Skip to main content

Full text of "The Sumerian Swindle"

See other formats

How The Jews Betrayed Mankind 

Volume 1: 



1 H 1 if 1 1 



bbbbbF *'^bM 

B/ fli 

» 1 

Br BJ 


K ■ ^ !l 

bbbI ft w m 

m mfm 

Ik I ^bbbbbI 

bbm! *bbI 

bbbai ^bbH 


Volume One of Three Volumes 

How the Jews Betrayed Mankind 

Volume I 
The Sumerian Swindle 


First Edition 


Bamboo Delight Company, Publisher 

Please email your comments to 

Interview with the Author Link 

Copies of this Acrobat file may be shared over the internet or printed, 
but the contents may not be changed in any way. 

This edition (vl.O) is complete with all text and graphics, 
however the Sources and Footnotes are located at the end of Volume III. 

To save ink and paper, only print pages 2 through 287 

Dedicated to my Parents 



Chapter 1 Mafia, Thugs and Jews 8 

Chapter 2 The Land of Mesopotamia, Cradle of Civilization 10 

Chapter 3 The Sumerian Swindle: Secrets of Wealth and Power 15 

Chapter 4 The Sumerians and the Beginning of Civilization 30 

Chapter 5 Life in Sumeria: the Haves and Have-Nots 46 

Chapter 6 Time in History, Warfare and Moneylending 58 

Chapter 7 The Assyrians and the Goat Rustlers 208 

Chapter 8 The Apiru, the Hapiru, the Habiru, the Hebrews 243 

Appendix Thugees of Old India 283 

References 288 

Footnotes 291 

Color Plates and Maps 299 

"When the Lord your God brings you into the land he swore to your fathers, to Abraham, 
Isaac and Jacob, to give you — a land with large, flourishing cities you did not build , 
houses filled with all kinds of good things you did not provide , wells you did not dig , and 
vineyards and olive groves you did not plant . . . 
(Deuteronomy 6:10-11) 

"The goyim shall rebuild your walls, and their kings shall minister unto you ... 
Your gates shall be open continuously; day and night they shall not be shut; that men may 
bring to you the wealth of the goyim, with their kings led in procession. For the goyim or 
kingdom that will not serve you; shall perish; those nations shall be utterly laid waste ..." 
(Isaiah 60:10-12) 

" You shall suck the milk of the goyim , you shall suck the breast of kings .... 
(Isaiah 60:10-16) 

"And goyim shall stand and feed your flocks, strangers shall be your 
plowmen and vinedressers; but you shall be called the priests of the Lord, men shall speak 
of you as the ministers of our God; you shall eat the wealth of the goyim, and in their 
riches you shall glory." (Isaiah 61:5-6) 

"Our race is the Master Race. We Jews are divine gods on this planet. We are as different 
from the inferior races as they are from insects. In fact, compared to our race, other races 
are beasts and animals, cattle at best. Other races are considered as human excrement. 
Our destiny is to rule over the inferior races. Our earthly kingdom will be ruled by our 
leader with a rod of iron. The masses will lick our feet and serve us as our slaves." 
-- Menachem Begin (1977 - 1983), Knesset speech, Jerusalem. 

Volume I 
The Sumerian Swindle 
(5,000 BC to 1500 BC) 


"In the beginning were the Jews." At least, this is how the Jews would write the history of 
Mankind if they could get away with it. But in fact, in the beginning, there were no Jews. The lies that 
they wrote about themselves in the Old Testament are just that - lies. Here is the real story of How the 
Jews Betrayed Mankind. 

By making grandiose claims that give themselves value when no value is actually there, those evil 
creatures known as rabbis will tell you that the Jews are a unique people blessed above all other people by 
the mightiest god of the entire Universe. This god has sanctified them above all other people because they 
are so squeaky clean. But this claim cannot stand even when casually inspected. 

Unique with their very own history, aloof from all outsiders, concentrating their energies on the 
glorification of their god, untouched by the crassness of the goyim around them as they strive for holiness 
and perfection - these are some of the attributes that the rabbis would like you to believe about them 
even though none of it is true. They would like you to believe that among men, the Jews are as rare and 
unique as a virgin mother. But are the Jews really unique or do they only tell you that they are? After all, it 
costs nothing to brag about yourself. And if self-congratulation brings you prestige, wealth and influence 
- all for the price of hot air and flapping lips - well, then, who has more hot air and flapping lips than a 
self- glorifying rabbi? 

Regardless of what the Jews say, when you inspect the actual merchandise, you will find that 
the sparkling Jews are only made of glass. This is why the Jews are so allergic to criticism because their 
lies are so easily broken. By claiming that they are unique, the Jews can more easily avoid the obvious 
observation that they are exactly like any other secretive groups that have plagued Mankind. They are not 
unique like shining saints but, rather, they are unique like carnival barkers and con artists who claim to 
be more than they are, just so that they can deceive you and relieve you of your money. 

Part of the reason that the People of the world have difficulty in understanding what scoundrels 
the Jews are, is because most people don't have the usual reference points for contrast. The Jews 
encourage this blindness by parroting their old lie that "we Jews are a unique people unlike any other." 
The Jews pretend to be God's Chosen Saints while simultaneously committing all manner of crimes and 
atrocities against Humanity. Ordinary people cannot discern the depths of the fraud simply because the 
distance between the actual facts of Jewish criminality and the self-glorified myth of Jewish holiness is so 
great - the distance between the reality and the lie is so great - that it boggles the mind. Little crooks are 
understandable but big crooks are difficult to fathom. 

Ordinary people (whom the Jews call "goyim" which means "non-Jew animals and insects") 
cannot imagine that entire families and an entire nation of betrayers and swindlers could possibly exist. 
Yes, single and small groups of robbers are understandable to the average person. But an entire nation 
of thieves and liars is too much for the ordinary person to comprehend. And so, because we cannot 
comprehend it, we do not believe that such an organized and predatory cult does exist. As a result, the 

Jews get away with their crimes and the People end up being swindled and betrayed, impoverished, 
defrauded and murdered by hucksters wearing yarmulkes. 

So that you will have open eyes before entering into the actual history of the Betrayers of 
Mankind, I will first show you some similarities of the Jews to another criminal conspiracy that had 
plagued Mankind undetected for many centuries. After all, to prove that the Jews are not as unique 
as they claim to be, it is necessary to first show their similarity to other people. So, if the Jews are not 
unique, then to whom are they similar? 

It is important first to get these general background ideas firmly in mind as you study this 
history of the Jews because we are dealing here with hundreds and thousands of years in time. And 
during this long time, entire families and clans and towns full of Jewish parents have been teaching their 
children their criminal skills and passing this conspiratorial lore and subterfuge along through countless 
generations of Jewish thieves and murderers. 

This is an historical fact that you must keep in mind as you read this book - consecutive 
generations of crime families have existed and they presently do exist while they protect their secrets 
and transmit their schemes through many subsequent generations of fathers and sons, mothers and 
daughters. And so, to prove that the Jews are criminals and frauds and liars and deceivers and murderers, 
it is necessary to first show that they are not a unique variation in human history. In fact, they are very 
similar to the Mafia crime families found in Italy and in America today and especially similar to the 
Thuggees of Old India. Such historic crime organizations as the Italian Mafia and the Thuggees of Old 
India have identical characteristics with the Jews of today as you will soon see for yourself. 

Chapter 1 
Mafia, Thugs and Jews 

For several hundred years in India, a similar people to the Jews used to live in family and clan 
villages. And they made their living as murderers and thieves. They called themselves Thugs or Thuggees. 
The Thugees of India were a secret society whose so-called "religion" was based upon murder and theft. 
They lived among their fellow Indians as rug weavers and artisans. To look at them, their fellow Indians 
could not tell that they were any different from themselves. They spoke the same language, wore the same 
clothes and ate the same food. But the Thugees worshipped the Hindu demon goddess, Kali . It was the 
Thugee belief that this demon goddess demanded that victims be sacrificed to her without shedding their 
blood - that is, the victims must first be strangled. 

For one month every year, during the travel season in India when the weather was good and there 
were many travelers and pilgrims on the roads, the Thugees would make some excuse to their employers 
and acquaintances and take a leave of absence from their regular occupations as merchants or weavers 
or restaurateurs or farmers. Saying that they had to go to a distant wedding or to visit an ailing relative 
or using whatever excuse that they could invent, they would leave their villages and go to meet other 
Thugees for a month of murder and theft, all devoted to their goddess Kali whom they believed would 
welcome them into the Hereafter. 

Known among themselves as "masters of deceit", the Thugees befriended rich travelers to whom 
they perfidiously offered their services as protectors and guides. But once they were in an out-of-the-way 
location, they would fall upon the travelers and strangle them. This was the one and the only method of 
murder decreed by their demon goddess, to strangle their victims, never to knife or bludgeon them. 

As they tightened the garrote around the neck of their victims, they whispered into their ears, 
"See, oh Kali! Look, oh Kali!" calling their goddess to witness the crime. Then, the Thugs stole all of their 
victim's possessions, mangled their faces so that they could never be identified and buried them deeply 
so that they could never be found. Their victims simply disappeared into the mystery of India. And when 
the travel season was over, the Thugees would return to their home villages with their newly acquired 
wealth and continue their lives as rug weavers and merchants, though richer than they had been before. 

The religious beliefs of the Thuggees was that they were the servants of their goddess. And just 
like the Jews, they served their deity by preying upon the people among whom they lived. And just like 
the Jews, their secret fraternity had their own secret language, secret meetings and secret rituals. Indeed, 
because of the criminal nature of their practices, just like the Jews, they kept their actions hidden from 
outsiders. And just like the Jews, without practicing secrecy and deceit they could not have perpetuated 
their wicked ways for so many centuries. 

Regardless of their alleged "religion" of Kali worship, the Thugees knew that if they were caught in 
their crimes, that they would be punished. So, like all other criminal gangs, everything that they did was 
plagued with the fear of discovery and exposure. Everything that they did was masked with deceit and 
the utmost secrecy. In these ways, they were not at all different from the Jews. 

India is home to many diverse religions. And Hinduism is very tolerant of all of them. Even 
though the Indian people and Hinduism in general are accepting of all manner of religious activities 
and beliefs, no one in India would have accepted among themselves a secret group of murderers whose 
religious practice was to stealthily murder everyone whom they met and to steal their wealth. So, to 

practice their so-called "religion" without being executed for their crimes, secrecy and deceit were their 
most important tactics. When they murdered people who were traveling in large groups, they murdered 
everyone in the entire group and left no one alive as witness. 

As organized gangs, during the three hundred years of known history of this Thugee cult, it has 
been estimated that the Thugees murdered between one million and three million people in India, stole 
their belongings and buried their corpses. These millions of Indian people simply disappeared, never to 
be heard of again. Then the Thugees would return to their villages and lead lives of simple folks who often 
had extra money to help their fellow villagers and thus gain prestige for themselves - just like the Jews. 

Each and every year, this same routine was repeated as the secrets of the Thugees were passed 
down to sons and passed down to grandsons without the people of India ever having heard of this 
cult - such was their secrecy. That the Thugees of India did not last for even longer than three hundred 
years was strictly due to the perseverance of the British in rooting them out. And the man who was 
primarily responsible for exterminating the Thuggees from India in the early 1800's was Major General 
Sir William Henry Sleeman. Read a first-hand account of this great British hero's description of the Thugs 
of India in the words of his biographer and great-grandson, Colonel James L. Sleeman in Appendix A . 
And remember that his description is of just one, sweet-looking old Indian man. As you read his words, 
realize that we are studying here another equally diabolical sect that is not at all unique but, rather, is very 
similar to the Thugs. 

Because these Thugees were an hereditary conspiracy, Major General Sleeman was able to 
extinguish these crime families by executing and imprisoning the fathers and imprisoning for life the 
sons. Thus, no Thugees were allowed to pass their evil teachings down to succeeding generations. And so, 
Thugee vanished from India, thanks to the British. 

Once you understand that crime families and their teachings are both hereditary and cultural, 
whether inherited from Mafia families or Thugee families, you are ready to study the origins of the most 
secretive sect of murderous fanatics that have ever walked the earth. Like the Thugees, these also hide 
behind a mask of religion. In modern times, these evil monsters are known as Jews. 

Chapter 2 
The Land of Mesopotamia, Cradle of Civilization 

Today, you might think that there is something new under the scorching, desert sun of Iraq. The 
dry soil is being blown into dust by the bombs of F-16 fighter jets. Huge tracts of the dry and fertile soil, 
groves of date palms, the flowing water of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers and the towns and villages are 
being poisoned with depleted uranium ordinance while pilotless robot killer drones fly high overhead, 
being piloted via satellite from half a world away. So, you might think that there is something new in 
the 14,000-year history of Mesopotamia, but you would be wrong. Of course, the tools for killing and 
the methods of destruction and genocide are more advanced today, but the land is just the same and the 
people are just the same as they were in 12,000 BC. 

Ancient Meso/potamia was located in what is today the modern country of Iraq. The wars that 
are tearing that land apart today are really being fought over the same reasons that wars were fought in 
Mesopotamia at the dawn of civilization. The actors and the tools and the war machines are different, 
but the reasons for bloodshed are the same. The sun, the wind, the water, the mud and the stars are all 
the same. The greed and the evil in the hearts of ruthless men, are just the same. The corruption of the 
political leaders and the avarice of the moneylenders is just the same as it has always been. The only 
difference is found in this book that you are reading. 

Although over 5,000 years have passed since the Sumerians first began what has become our 
modern civilization, the geography and weather of modern Iraq is nearly identical to what it was during 
those earlier times. The climate is extremely hot and dry. Temperatures in central and southern Iraq can 
reach 120 degrees Fahrenheit (49 degrees Celsius). The soil is arid and wind swept. Mostly the land is 
rather flat with low, undulating mounds and hillocks. In the course of millions of years, the Tigris and 
Euphrates Rivers have meandered throughout the Mesopotamian Basin, uncovering and re-depositing 
the clay and silt soils of the region and producing a river-made land of mud, clay and silt with almost no 
stone and no minerals. It is a land of dust and dirt and mud and hot sun. 

There were no trees in ancient Mesopotamia but there were giant reeds around the rivers and 
in the southern marshes. What geological variety there was in the somewhat flat landscape consisted of 
desert, foothills, steppes and marshes with no rainfall in the summer months. The higher elevation steppe 
lands in those ancient times were grasslands, almost treeless with an average rainfall of ten inches. In the 
foothills, oak, pine, terebinth trees, grasses, wild barley and wild wheat could grow. The flood season of 
the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers is between April and June, which is too early for winter crops and not 
long enough for summer crops. 

So, by appearances, you would at first think that such a desolate place could not possibly produce 
the world's first civilization. But Mesopotamia is where civilization began. And it was a civilization that 
grew up out of the water, the mud and the hot, scorching sun. f 1 ] 

As the Ice Age was ending, the hunter- gatherer people of 12,000 BC learned that they could make 
a living by gathering the seeds of the wild grasses that grew throughout the region. What few people there 
were in the world at that time, lived in open air camps or in caves or in huts built of reeds. As hunters, 
they had found a good companion with another hunter, the wolves. These became the first domesticated 
animal by 1 1,000 BC. And the dog has been Man's best friend ever since those Stone Age times. 

By about 9,000 BC, the people had learned how to make mud bricks. They developed weaving and 


craft specializations. They carried on long-distance trade in obsidian and copper. As hunters who had 
killed the adult nannies and who had raised and tamed the kids, they were able to domesticate the goat by 
8500 BC. With milk goats, these Stone Age people didn't have to go hungry from scarce game because, by 
that time, they could use their hunting skills in protecting their herds from predators. By 8000 BC, they 
had also domesticated the sheep which provided them with woolen clothes as well as meat. 

As the Ice Age retreated and the weather warmed, all across the the grassy hills of the Ancient 
Near East, the people discovered that if they could gather and store enough grass seeds that they didn't 
have to wander about with their goats and sheep but could stay in one location where the wild grasses 
provided food both for them as well as their flocks. These grasses grew in such abundance that even a 
single person working for two weeks with an obsidian blade could harvest enough to feed a family of four 
for a year. When an entire family or a village cooperated with such a harvest, there was plenty of food for 
everybody. Because grain does not decay if it is kept dry, it can last for decades. A reliable food supply 
allowed for the establishment of permanent camps, allowing the wandering hunter-gatherers to settle 
down into villages where, by 7500 BC, they domesticated the wild pig. By 7000 BC, cattle and the always 
useful rodent-catching cat were domesticated. And they discovered how to make pottery for cooking and 
for storing grain away from insects and rodents. 

All of the peoples living throughout this entire Fertile Crescent region , stretching in an arch 
from the Mediterranean Sea to the Persian Gulf, gathered these wild grasses. These grasses sustained a 
scattering of small, permanent villages for 3,000 years of small farming. But it was in the land between 
the two rivers of the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers with their copious and reliable water supplies that 
farming was able to blossom into the foundation for civilized life. 

The long mountain chain that divides Mesopotamia from Persia, the rich valley of the Two 
Rivers from the sand desert, is broken down at its southern end by the watershed of the Karun River. 
Here is Elam (the "East"), an alluvial plain closed in on all sides except the western where it is open to 
Mesopotamia and the Persian Gulf. It is geographically a part of Mesopotamia rather than of Persia. 

The vast deposits of silt carried down by the Karun river from Elam, formed a bar across the 
upper end of the Persian Gulf which held up the flood waters of the Tigris and Euphrates so that their silt 
was deposited against the bar instead of being swept out to sea. With the slackened current much silt was 
dropped higher up and gradually filled in the marshes, forming dry land through which the Euphrates 
cut its bed. Also flowing into this delta region in ancient times, but now dried up, was a fourth river out 
of Arabia which created the area known to us as Eden, the land of the four rivers. 

The sedimentary soil from these rivers was immensely fertile, and invited settlement. But rich 
as the soil was, and easy as was the tillage, yet to profit by its richness required much labor on a large 
scale. It was not a land in which the isolated farmer could prosper. The seed had, of course, to be sown 
in winter; and in spring, just as the young grain sprouted, the river came down in flood, overran and 
scoured out the fields and destroyed all hopes of harvest. The river had to be kept in check by artificial 
banks. The land, if it was to yield a second crop, had to be irrigated by canals. The need was obvious, but 
the task was beyond the powers of any one landowner. [ 2 ] 

To grow grain in the dry soils of southern Mesopotamia, the farmers dug ditches to carry water 
from the rivers to the dry fields. This soil, this river-made soil, once it was irrigated, proved to be very 
fertile and it produced tremendous crops beneath the bright sun. With plenty of food, with mud bricks 
for building their homes and clay pottery for cooking and storing their foods, civilization began in 
southern Iraq - all based upon water, dirt, sun, grain and intense physical labor. 

We call these earliest people in Mesopotamia "Ubaidians" after Tell al Ubaid where their pottery 
was first discovered by modern archeologists. Although they were Stone Age people, using flint and 
obsidian and bone and wood for their tools, the modern reader should not look down upon these 
ancient people with distain. All of these ancient people were of the same species of Homo Sapiens as we 


are, ourselves. So, it is important to remember that they had the same feelings, the same love for their 
children, the same social ambitions and the same intelligence that we have in our own modern lives. 
Of course, they did not have the same knowledge and understanding about the world around them 
or the same educational level as we do. They were less knowledgable than we are but they were just as 
intelligent . Indeed, the knowledge that we, ourselves, have today is built upon the very knowledge that 
those early people developed. So, we should look upon those ancient people more as our very own great- 
great-great-grandparents rather than as some distant and dusty barbarians to whom we owe nothing. 

That being said, you will find it profitable to keep the humanity of these people in mind during 
this study so that you can better understand the theme of this book. What we call "modern civilization" 
is a direct result of what those early people invented. Even the foundation for the very words that you are 
now reading were developed by the inhabitants of Mesopotamia when they invented writing over 5,000 
years ago. 

At 9,000 BC, as the last of the Ice Age was disappearing, the Udaidians went about their lives of 
sowing and reaping grains and domesticating animals. They left behind for us to dig up and to wonder 
about, tools such as hoes, obsidian adzes and knives, sickles, mud bricks and baked bricks, spindle 
whorls, loom weights, sculpture, painted pottery and the plow. They marked their possessions with clay 
stamps and cylinder seals. But they also built canals and irrigation ditches and dedicated large mud-brick 
temples to their gods. And for such architecture, calculation skills in arithmetic were required as well as a 
basic knowledge of geometry. They used water clocks - clay bowls with a small hole in the bottom, which 
were floated in a basin of water so that they could mark time by how long it took for the bowl to sink. 
With these clocks, their village chiefs and town governors were able to regulate the amount of irrigation 
water each field was allowed. 

Although they had no written records, they relied upon what all of the ancient peoples relied 
upon and of which we modern people have limited abilities - their memories. With no written records 
with which to store information about their past, they used the well-developed faculties of their human 
brains to memorize the events of the their times and to pass along to their children the stories of their 
past. They began their stories by claiming that all of their civilization got its start at the town of Eridu in 
the southern part of the country. And these stories were passed along to the people who came after the 

It is important for you to identify with those ancient people as fellow humans so that you can 
fully understand the theme of this present history. They were just as human in every way as you are. 
In their clay sculptures we can see how the Ubaidians saw themselves. And it is here that I want you to 
understand some secrets that the archeologists and scientists have overlooked - the real humanity of 
those ancient people. You must not look at their sculptures in the same way as do the archeologists who 
egotistically consider themselves more modern and therefore more advanced in their own humanity. By 
doing so, the scientists blind themselves to the advanced knowledge of those ancient people. 

It is often remarked how reptilian and alien the Ubaidian sculptures are. [see Figure 1 1 And it 
is difficult for the archeologists (or almost anybody else) to imagine how a people could look so extra- 
terrestrial and odd. But this is because the modern scientists do not perceive those ancient people 
through human eyes but only through cold scientific lenses. They look only at the hard data and forget 
that the cold pottery and clay sculptures reflect the workmanship of living people who, although they 
could not read or write their ideas, could sculpt them. 

To understand the secret knowledge that the Ubaidian sculptors were expressing, you need 
only to ask yourself the question: "Who am I?" or the question: "What am I?" And then, try to make a 
sculpture of yourself or of your friends or family in answer to that question. This is what the Ubaidian 
sculptors did. And this is why their features look so odd because what they were showing was not just 
their outer appearance but their inner Being . In this respect, they were expressing something far in 


advance of what most modern people understand about themselves. In those sculptures, they were 
expressing their true selves . 

Certainly, the Ubaidians did not look into mirrors, because there were no mirrors other than 
pools of standing water. They knew what they looked like reflected in water so their sculptures of 
themselves were expressing something other than that. They were not fooled in the same way that 
modern people are fooled by the sharp and reverse image of themselves looking back from a mirrored 
glass. Most modern people think that what they see in a mirror, is a reflection of their true selves. But 
they are wrong. In a mirror, you are only looking at the reverse reflection of your outside appearance and 
not your inner being. Can you deny that you exist inside of yourself as well as outside of yourself? Isn't 
there something inside of you that makes you a Human Being? You cannot see your inner self in a mirror . 
For that, you must close and squint your eyes in order to perceive yourself on the inside ! To see your false 
self in a mirror, you must open your eyes; to see your True Self within, you must close your eyes. 

To understand these Ubaidian sculptures, and to actually see one of these people with your very 
own eyes, you must see what they saw Ask yourself the question, "Who am I?" and then breathe gently 
and look out from your eyes. But do not look out too far, rather look through just the slits of your eyes 
so as to view yourself in the living act of looking outward. Breathe gently and lower your eyelids. Ask 
yourself, "Who am I?" and close your eyes slightly into slits and breathe gently and look within yourself at 
how your face is shaped on the inside , at how your nose breathes life from the inside , at how you can see 
and feel what you are like on the inside . And why? Because this is the living spirit of you looking out from 
the inside. This is not the same as looking at a cold and distant reflected image of yourself in a mirror. 

And so, the view that the ancient Ubaidians had of themselves is true while the view that modern 
people have of themselves is false. How can you say that you are superior to the Ancient People if your 
views are false? And now you know what they looked like reflected in yourself . This is the meaning of 
the clay models that the Ubaidians made of themselves. They were then as you are now, a living Being 
looking out through half-closed eyes. 

This view of themselves as self-contained spirits within a mortal shell may have affected their 
selfishness. People who think in terms of only themselves, are not very empathetic to the lives of their 
fellows. The slit-eyed, reptilian statues that the Ubaidians left of themselves not only reflected their inner 
awareness of Self but also an unconcern for how they were perceived by others. And this selfishness was 
passed along to the Sumerians who inherited the Ubaidian Culture. 

As the Ubaidians grew in numbers through the success of their agricultural efforts, they began 
to organize themselves around their priests and temples. The ancient peoples looked to their priests 
for guidance and ALL of the ancient peoples believed in many gods. This is important to remember: 
ALL of the ancient peoples believed in the gods. There were no atheists in ancient times . There were no 
Communists, Jews, Humanists or Feminists telling them that they were nothing but animals. There were 
no scientists telling them that they were nothing but monkeys descended from more primitive monkeys. 
They wouldn't have believed such fables because they were smarter than that. 

You can understand these ancient people if you think like a child in awe of Creation. For example, 
that hot, yellow, blinding disk that rises and sets everyday and lights up and heats the entire world! How 
fantastic! But what is it? What could it be? When the clouds partly cover it, it looks like a great bright 
wheel that rolls across the sky. Or maybe it is a great eye in the sky looking down upon Mankind. And 
of course, the world was flat because you could see that it was laid out as a vast plain with mountains 
and rivers and a great starry sky full of twinkling, shining gods that circled about overhead. Of course 
the stars circled the earth because you could see them move, yourself! And the earth was solid and 
immovable because you could feel it under your feet as such. And that cool, white moon that rises and 
sets in the night sky! What is it? A goddess? 

Of course, the Ancient Ones had no telescopes to tell them that the moon is a rocky sphere 


orbiting in space or that the sun is a ball of nuclear gasses. But if you look at the world as they saw it, you 
will see that the bright thing that waxes and wanes in the night sky resembles a disk. The disk changes 
into horns like on a cow Or perhaps it looks more like a reed boat in the sky. And of course, that great sea 
of stars is a Milky Way highway, a path through the sky that leads off into distant lands where the gods 
live and where Mankind will someday journey. 

Or clouds and rainbows! Birds and beasts! Rivers and oceans! Rain and wind and lightning and 
thunder! Look again, O Modern Man! Look at all of the natural phenomenon that we modern people 
take for granted! Look at Nature again with innocent eyes! All of these things are still just as fresh and 
full of wonder as they were 12,000 years ago. The only thing that has changed is the dulling of perceptive 
astuteness of the people today who consider themselves superior to the Ancient Ones who built the very 
foundations of our own world culture. 

To understand those ancient people, you must empty your mind of modern theories and look at 
the world around you with the mind of child. A child knows nothing but is willing to see and hear and 
learn everything. Only then can you understand what the ancient people knew and what the ancient 
people are still trying to tell us if we will only listen. The Ancient Ones have secrets to tell us but most of 
us are too arrogant in our knowledge and conceited in our wealth to listen to the dusty past. In this book, 
I will tell you some of those long lost secrets that have not been told since the world was young. 

The Ubaidians lived in Iraq for nearly 5,000 years before they learned how to read and write. Can 
you imagine? Five thousand years of a functioning culture but not one person knowing how to read and 
write! And yet they built cities, monumental architecture, city walls, invented the wheel and agriculture, 
invented cylinder seals, and by 4,000 BC they were experimenting with the very beginnings of writing. 
Also, they invented something else that would be passed along to the next wave of people entering 
Mesopotamia. They invented the Sumerian Swindle which came into full flower upon the arrival of the 
Sumerians around 3200 BC. 

The Sumerian Swindle was so secret that not even today's scientists and modern scholars have 
been able to understand its workings. Throughout history, this ancient weapon has destroyed entire 
countries, snuffed out the lives of hundreds of millions of people worldwide, created starvation, disease, 
warfare and ecological doom, with few people learning the true cause of these disasters. The Sumerian 
Swindle actually has the power to destroy the world. 

So really, do you think the ancient people were so dumb if we modern people and even our 
greatest scientists still cannot understand what they accomplished? Better think again and ask yourself, 
"How smart are our modern scientists and philosophers today, if they don't understand even the simplest 
inventions of Antiquity? How smart are our political and religious leaders if the inventions of 5,000 BC 
are too complicated for them?" 

You should have some respect for the intellectual achievements of Ancient Man because his 
inventions have not only shaped our modern world but those same inventions also threaten to destroy 
it. I am not referring to destroying the world with nuclear bombs or genetically modified germs. I am 
referring to destroying the world with the ancient mechanism of the Sumerian Swindle. 


Chapter 3 
The Sumerian Swindle: Secrets of Wealth and Power 

You readers who are bankers or Jews or other assorted thieves and con artists might want to skip 
this chapter since you already know how to betray your country and defraud your people. But for those 
of you who don't like being enslaved and impoverished, learning something about how the Jews do it can 
save your health, your wealth, your family, your people and your nation. 

First, we must understand some basic cogs in the machinery that makes the Sumerian Swindle 
work. I am writing down these secrets for the very first time in history so if you didn't think of them first, 
yourself, then perhaps it is because these secrets are too simple for a modern person to understand. Or, 
perhaps you have taken them for granted because they "have always been here." 

The Sumerian Swindle started like this: If you are on good terms with your next-door neighbor, 
and you run short of some flour or eggs in the middle of cooking supper, a neighborly thing to do is 
to run next door or send your children next door to borrow what you need until you can go to the 
market and restock supplies. After shopping, you will repay your neighbor for the borrowed food. Such 
borrowing among neighbors has been going on ever since people began living together in groups - that 
is, for the past ten or twenty million years. Borrowing and repaying, is a way to build friendships and 
to sustain society. Borrowing and repaying, is a vital mechanism in every human society. But it became 
corrupted among the Ubaidians of Mesopotamia. 

As the people whom we call the Ubaidians first practiced irrigated cultivation of crops, something 
about this natural human relationship changed. Perhaps one neighbor got tired of constantly lending 
out grain to another neighbor who was slow to repay. So, it happened that at a certain time, the lending 
neighbor agreed to lend out a measure of grain only if the borrower agreed to repay a measure and a 
handful; or perhaps a basket of grain was lent out in return for a basket-and-a-half in repayment; or 
perhaps, sensing the reluctance of a neighbor to loan, the borrower, himself, out of charitable good will 
and personal need, offered to repay two baskets of grain for one loaned. 

Whatever the actual origin of the mechanism, the Ubaidians evolved a system that we today call, 
"interest on a loan". This occurred sometime between 9,000 and 6,000 BC when they first began building 
their permanent mud brick towns and villages. Central grain storehouses were a part of every town. And 
in every town and village, individual grain storeage space was a part of every house. So, when the larder 
was empty, borrowing from a neighbor kept starvation from the door and promoted friendly relations 
among neighbors in a harmonious society of give and take. 

But something else occurred in the actual understanding of this development in the minds of 
both the borrower and the lender. A borrower who repays the loan has nothing left in his hands to 
contemplate. But the lender who gains back the loan plus interest has more than he started with to 
contemplate. The poor man is even poorer than he was and the rich man is richer than he was. The actual 
physical ownership of the grain plus interest enabled the lender to accumulate an ever- increasing store of 
goods. In addition to what he started with, both the returned loan as well as the interest could be loaned 
out at interest . And that interest when repaid could again be loaned out in a spiraling increase in total 

This was the beginning of the Sumerian Swindle. Two baskets of grain on loan at 50% interest 
brought back three baskets. These three could again be loaned at 50% interest to bring back four-and-a- 
half These four- and-a-half could again be loaned to bring back six and three-quarters. In a short time, 
those original two baskets produced an additional four and three-quarters baskets of grain for free . And 


so on, and so on, as an increasing spiral of profits accumulated for free and for doing no work other than 
making loans. As the size and number of loans increased, the total wealth of the grain lender began to 
increase far beyond the wealth of his neighbors. 

Then, a magical and mysterious thing happened. Once a certain profit point had been reached 
where the lender was loaning out not his original grain but the grain that he had previously received as 
interest , then everything that he profited from that point onward was wealth given to him for free . The 
grain that he received as interest-on-the-loan had cost him nothing. And when he loaned out that same 
grain at interest , both it and its returning interest were free grain that had also cost him nothing. This 
free grain continued to multiply over time as it was loaned out again and again. Huge mountains of grain 
filling his storerooms to the rafters began to accumulate, grain that had cost him absolutely nothing more 
than charging interest-on-a-loan. 

In those days, a man's wealth was measured by how much land and grain he had and by how 
many goats and sheep that he owned. Very soon, those Ubaidian grain and silver lenders were enjoying 
vast fortunes. Thanks to the arithmetic deception of lending- at- interest, they were loaning out at interest 
what they had gotten for free. Eventually, using that free grain in barter for other goods, everything that 
they owned actually had cost them absolutely nothing at all! 

The lender found that by loaning out a basket of grain, he got back two baskets instead. Of 
course, a light bulb did not go off in his head since it was still the Stone Age, seven thousand years before 
Benjamin Franklin and Thomas Edison, but certainly the very first loan shark had a major brainstorm! 
Without working under the hot sun, without lifting a single load upon his head, without walking a single 
step, two baskets of grain were delivered to his door. And the one who delivered the grain was glad to do 
it since the loan had helped him through a difficult time. After all, they were all fellow villagers and all on 
good relations with one another. The hatreds would come much later. 

The Sumerian Swindle has twenty-one secret frauds. The Twenty-One Secret Frauds of the 
Sumerian Swindle are: 

#1 All interest on the loan of money is a swindle. 

#2 Collateral that is worth more than the loan, is the banker's greatest asset. 

#3 Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender. 

#4 Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral. 

#5 The debtor is the slave of the lender. 

#6 High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the 

moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will. 

#7 Monopoly gives wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power. 

#8 Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; international crime families are 

the most successful of all. 

#9 Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph. 

#10 Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower. 

#11 Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers 

when the people are impoverished. 

#12 All private individuals who control the public's money supply are swindling traitors to both people 

and country. 

#13 All banking is a criminal enterprise; all bankers are international criminals, so secrecy is essential. 

#14 Anyone who is allowed to lend- at- interest eventually owns the entire world. 

#15 Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons. 

#16 Labor is the source of wealth; control the source and you control the wealth, raise up labor and you 

can pull down kings. 


#17 Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be 


#18 When the source of goods is distant from the customers, profits are increased both by import and 


#19 Prestige is a glittering robe for ennobling treason and blinding fools; the more it is used, the more it 

profits he who dresses in it. 

#20 Champion the Minority in order to dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle 

the Minority out of that wealth and power. 

#21 Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body. 

Grain could be bartered for goats, and goats for woven cloth and boats; and boats and goats and 
grain could be exchanged for houses and irrigated land, etc. By loaning grain out at interest and using 
the interest-income to barter for other goods, a clever trader could leverage his way to more wealth than 
any of his neighbors even though all of them had started off at the same level in society. Like the modern 
bankers who pile up their swindled wealth into skyscrapers, yachts and Lear Jets, investments in war and 
cornering the commodities market, the Ubaidian moneylenders began to pile up wealth in grain, silver 
and land. By getting something for nothing simply by charging interest-on-a-loan, they had discovered 
Secret Fraud #1 of the Sumerian Swindle: "All interest on the loan of money is a swindle." 

It might seem odd, but the fact is that all of the excessive wealth of modern day bankers, 
financiers, loan sharks, Jews, and related swindlers, is based upon nothing more than two baskets of 
barley creating three. Secret Fraud #1 of the Sumerian Swindle was based upon what people all over the 
world had been doing for millions of years. If one member of a village or tribe was short of supplies, other 
members would give or loan him what he needed. And when he was able, he would return the borrowed 
goods or else return goods of equal value. But to insist that he return more than he had borrowed was the 

In all farming communities where drought, insects, fire, rain, flooding and a myriad of woes 
plague farmers, there are always farmers who need a loan to get through the bad spell. Lending and 
paying back, borrowing and returning, have always been a part of normal human society. 

At first, this normal and natural system was used in Mesopotamia. If a farmer needed a basket of 
grain for his family, he would borrow it from a neighbor. And when the harvest came in, he would repay 
what he had borrowed. This was a natural and a balanced exchange system; no one profited and no one 
lost . Yet, the entire community benefited . Goods were distributed in an equitable way which was good 
and natural and fair to everybody. 

However, once a lender asked for more in return than what he had lent , an unnatural imbalance 
was introduced into society. No longer were men equal and dependant upon their work for their material 
rewards in Life. Interest-on-a-loan created the inequality of those who became rich without actually 
working for their wealth and those who became poor in spite of incessant labor. In other words, charging 
interest-on-a-loan automatically created a diseased situation in society where the rich sucked the life 
out of the poor. It created two social classes of financial vampires living off of the blood and sweat of the 
permanently impoverished. 

Why is lending- at- interest an unnatural phenomenon? That it is unnatural can be seen by looking 
at Nature, herself. Making loans by those who "have" to those who "do not have", is a natural attribute of 
all beings who live in social groups. No matter what creatures or even what forms of symbiotic animal or 
plant life that you care to study, you will find that lending and paying back, is one of the characteristics 
that keep societies both strong and prosperous. 

Ants and bees create huge societies of individual members who make loans to one another as a 
part of their daily life. Indeed, without loans the bee and ant colonies would have died out hundreds of 


millions of years ago. 

When an ant is hungry, she approaches another member of her colony taps a few appropriate 
messages with her antenna against the antenna of her sister ant, and if this sister ant has food in her 
stomach, she will regurgitate a portion and give it to the hungry one to eat. In this manner, enormous 
amounts of labor and time are saved since the hungry ant does not have to travel back to the colony for a 
meal but can approach the lunch wagon no farther than the nearest worker. Thus, the colony can extend 
its power over a greater scavenging area through this mutual system of colony- wide food distribution 
and sharing. In many more ways, this loaning of food between ants gives the entire colony more power, 
success and prosperity. Later, after she has eaten her fill back at the colony food larder or from scavenged 
foods found in the field, the borrowing ant eventually returns food from its stomach to whatever hungry 
sister ant who asks. The same is true for bees. 

Thus, it can be seen that "loaning" and "borrowing" and "paying back" are all part of animal social 
groups that increase the prosperity and survivability of the entire colony. No individual loses and no 
individual gains because it is a balanced and a natural system in which all members benefit. Not a single 
one of those humble insects ever asks for more than it needs, nor does it amass for itself a special hoard 
of crumbs or honey stashed in a private and secret hide away that is a result of taking but of not giving 
back. The ants and bees have been making interest-free loans to one another for a billion years and they 
have thrived as social creatures. 

Ancient Man, also, has borrowed and loaned and paid back. As a result, everybody has benefited 
and everybody has survived. But Modern Man has been charging interest-on-loans for the past five 
thousand years and we are racked with warfare, famine, disease, ecological destruction and many other 
social catastrophes while the fat bankers preen themselves in their luxury chalets and counting houses. 
This is all a result of the Sumerian Swindle. Even a lowly lichen adhering to a rock is a higher and more 
natural form of life form than is a moneylender, financier, banker or Jew. 

Mankind is a social creature who makes loans to his fellows. Perhaps the hunt for game was not 
lucky for one family group so they would share in the roasted gazelle that their neighbor had caught 
that day. And when they were lucky in the hunt, they would share their fresh deer meat with that 
same neighbor who had not been lucky or else share a basket of grain or acorns or berries. In this way, 
Mankind, as a social creature, was able to thrive through the power of mutual helpfulness and sharing. 
Making loans to one another and paying back, gave the entire tribe more resiliency and strength. If 
one had food, all had food. In this way, everybody lived through mutual help and no one died through 

But woe to the greedy or selfish tribe members who were anti-social by refusing to share what 
they had! Woe to those who borrowed but did not give back! They became ignored and ostracized. 
They were known as "takers." They only took but did not give back. And if they didn't get the social 
message when their own wants were rebuffed, then eventually they became outcasts and perished alone 
in the wilderness with no tribe to sustain them. In this way, natural selection improved Mankind as a 
social creature. Like the ants and bees who shared in mutual prosperity, Mankind was also at One with 
Nature as he used loans and sharing for greater group strength and solidarity. Love of one's neighbor 
was expressed through giving. And through giving and sharing, strong personal and social bonds were 
forged, providing the ancient people with strength against all adversaries. 

To fully understand the Sumerian Swindle, throw aside your conditioning and your "take-it-for- 
granted" state of mind and understand this idea of "interest-on-a-loan" from a new perspective. The First 
Secret Fraud of the Sumerian Swindle is: "All interest on the loan of money is a swindle." That's right. 
Every banker and moneylender is a deceiving thief and a cruel swindler although he tries to keep this fact 
hidden. So, to make it easy to understand - simplify, simplify. 

In modern times, the Sumerian Swindle is like the old shell game of hiding a pea under a shell. 


This game is so simple: just one pea and three walnut shells. And yet the pea gets lost from view both by 
the mixing up of the walnut shells but also by the deft manipulations of the huckster using sleight-of- 
hand. A good street hustler using nothing but three walnut shells and a pea, can separate the gawking 
suckers from their money in a short time if they place their bets on the wrong shell because he can always 
make sure that it is the wrong shell. 

To repeat: All interest on the loan of money is a swindle . And the moneylenders and bankers 
are all criminals. Part of the trick in their black art, is that moneylenders have been around since 
Mesopotamian times so that these parasites have been taken for granted and accepted as a "normal" part 
of society. But bankers are not at all normal. They are all crooks . However well-dressed and honest they 
pretend to be, the bankers are no different than a street hustler manipulating a pea among walnut shells. 
But to make the game more to their benefit, they manipulate trillions of peas between billions of walnut 
shells so that no one seems to be able to keep track of where all the money goes except themselves. That 
all of the money disappears into the bankers' pockets isn't noticed in the confusion caused by some 
winners and some losers milling about and wondering what happened to the economy. 

To illustrate the Sumerian Swindle and for the sake of unraveling this ancient mystery in a simple 
way, let's assume that there is only one moneylender in the whole world and only two pieces of money. 
The two pieces of money can be lumps of gold or silver, pennies, francs, yuan, Reich marks, dollars, 
whatever name you wish to use for them - but there are only two of them. I could use two dollars for 
this example or even two pennies but since the Mesopotamians used weights of silver in their system of 
exchange, let's do the same for this as well as for the examples given later. A shekel weight of silver was 
about one-third ounce or about eight grams. Let's assume that there are only two shekels of silver in the 
whole world. 

Now suppose that there are two men who want to borrow from the Mesopotamian banker one 
shekel of silver each. Either they are merchants or farmers or perhaps only a parent wishing to have a big 
wedding party and dowry for a beloved daughter. Each man goes to the banker to borrow one shekel of 
silver, which the banker loans at fifty percent interest for one year. 

Now, remember , (for the sake of this illustration) there are only two shekels of silver in the entire 
world . At fifty percent interest for each shekel, that means that each borrower must return one and a half 
shekels to the banker at the end of the year. And if each man returns to the banker one and a half shekels, 
that adds up to a total of three shekels that the banker will have in his hands. But remember , there are 
only two shekels of silver in the entire world! So, how can these borrowers return to the banker three 
shekels of silver? 

In fact, it is impossible. We can see the impossibility when the problem is simplified like this. But 
this impossibility is hidden from the average man because in reality, the amounts of money are so large 
and they involve so many borrowers that the swindle is not so easily perceived. And yet, there is always 
less money available in reality than what the banker demands because the arithmetic creates something 
that is not really there - an extra shekel out of thin air. You can call it simple arithmetic but the ancient 
moneylenders called it quite simply, "Oy Gevalt! A miracle!" From this phantom of interest-on-a-loan, all 
other frauds arose within the Sumerian Swindle, a swindle of phantom interest demanding repayment in 
real goods. 

As the centuries wore on and then more centuries wore on, this idea of making loans with an 
interest charge attached to them became an accepted idea. It was difficult to give a goat for a wedding 
feast and expect to be paid back two goats, or to loan the use of a field and expect two fields in return. But 
if a goat could be given and repaid with a goat plus a basket of grain, then a new kind of bargaining began 
to evolve. The use of a field could be loaned out with so-many baskets of grain given as rent. And so it 
went. Throughout the hundreds of years before the Sumerians arrived in Mesopotamia, this new system 
was in place of making loans-at-interest. 


At first, the ethics of the Ubaidian moneylenders was not much different than that of their own 
people. Small towns keep their individual people adhering to society's norms through social pressures 
and gossip. In the small villages where everybody knew everybody else, it was very rare for one neighbor 
to steal from or to swindle another without everybody finding out about it. Retribution was either 
exacted with fisticuffs or death, or the neighborly aggressor would be called before the council of elders 
or the village chief and the disagreements would come under public scrutiny. It was social pressure alone 
that kept those who loaned-at-interest within a reasonableness that was conducive to social harmony. 
These are the facts of small village life. If people are to get along, then one citizen cannot be allowed to 
prey upon another. 

Strangely enough for such a dishonest system, money lending, itself, depends upon the goodness 
and honesty of Mankind. It posits the proposition that anyone who borrows is obligated by the honor of 
his name and the holiness of his promise to repay the principle and interest on the loan. This is where 
the swindle gets most of its power because it relies upon the borrower being honest. It relies upon the 
borrower being honorable. It relies upon the borrower being god-fearing and true to his word. But it does 
not depend upon the lender of money to be any of these things. Thus, Secret Fraud #3 was incorporated 
at an early time: "Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender." 

By 4000 BC, not only had the Ubaidians developed small towns and an organized society but they 
had also developed into two social classes which were named the awilum [the Haves] and the muskenum 
[the Have-Nots]. This system of getting back more than they lent out, developed over a period of more 
than a thousand years. So, the incremental change in the wealth and power of the awilum [the Haves] 
over the muskenum [the Have-Nots] was not noticed since it was so gradually accomplished. Through 
many generations, rich fathers taught their sons how to parasitize their neighbors and the poor fathers 
taught their sons that after borrowing grain from the awilum [the Haves] that the honest thing to do was 
to pay back that grain plus interest because "that's how it has always been." Instead of being recognized as 
an aberration, the system itself began to be accepted as normal. 

For the awilum [the Haves], this loan-and-interest became an asset that could be passed along 
to his sons. And the original loan that had cost them nothing and which brought them more wealth 
for free in interest payments, could also be passed from one generation to the next as grain- and silver- 
lending families bequeathed to their descendants the fruits of the Sumerian Swindle as ongoing accounts. 
Eventually, wealthy families and wealthy individuals arose who, through greed and acquisitive barter, 
were able to gain a large share of the total wealth of the community. Over many generations, those 
families became owners of large properties and the employers of many laborers to work those properties. 
Farms, silver, grain, land and slaves, all became theirs. And they got it all for free . 

Lending- at- interest became commonly accepted as an ordinary part of the Pre-Literate 
Mesopotamian society simply because it "has always been here". The rich insisted on their "rights of 
ownership" and the poor accepted their poverty since it was brought upon them so gradually by the 
subtlety of the swindle that they didn't notice the decline of their well-being. 

Later, a new fraud was developed when the farmers could see no reason to pay back loans of grain 
to lenders who already had more than they needed. As fellow citizens, it didn't seem fair that a rich grain 
lender would demand payment from a poor farmer who barely had enough to eat. So, the farmers, being 
honest and fair folks, began to only pay back the principle but not the interest on the loan. In response, 
the lenders began to demand that loans-at-interest be secured with property. As a result, loans that were 
not repaid plus interest, forfeited the farm. In this way, the lenders began to acquire not only more grain 
and silver but also more farms as they developed Secret Fraud #2 of the Sumerian Swindle: "Collateral 
that is worth more than the loan, is the banker's greatest asset." 

Social upheaval did not occur immediately because there was still vacant land that could be 
settled so that there was still a place for the dispossessed to move to. Through the loaning of grain or 


silver at interest and then being dispossessed of their farms, the People were forced to dig new irrigation 
systems and build up the raw land farther from the rivers. Although the Sumerian Swindle had worked 
its inevitable evil, the effects were diluted because there was still places for the people to go. The poor did 
not rise up and kill the rich but a greater social distance developed between the rich and the poor. As 
villages grew into cities, and there was a greater social distance and impersonality between the wealthy 
who lent money and the poor who borrowed from them, a more callous, ruthless attitude developed in 
the rich and a more seething hatred developed in the poor. 

Once society accepted the legitimacy of collecting interest-on-a-loan and once the cities grew into 
more impersonal sizes, the moneylenders were free to take whatever profits they could even by resorting 
to force. And force was often necessary when the moneylender wanted to dispossess a family from their 
lands and possessions. Pulling a struggling child from the arms of a fighting and screaming mother and 
father required force. Pushing entire families off of their farms required force. And with increased wealth, 
the moneylenders who did not have enough strong sons and male relatives also became the employers of 
guards and goons and strong-armed gangs of enforcers. 

The moneylenders could get away with their swindles because they were swindling honest people 
who mistakenly assumed that the moneylenders also were honest and their loans were legitimate. Secret 
Fraud #3 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "Loans rely on the honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of 
the lender." 

If you have ever inspected a modern credit card contract or any other banking document, there 
is always "fine print". In addition to tiny print that is difficult to read, it is often printed with gray ink, 
making it even more difficult to decipher. Have you ever wondered why this is so? If the bankers and 
credit card companies are honest businessmen, then why do they use tricks and deceit in order to trick 
you into entering into one of their fraudulent contracts? The question is rhetorical. Basically, banker and 
credit card companies are all swindlers. Their entire industry is criminal in nature, so secrecy, tricks and 
deceit are part and parcel of the bankers' business methods. 

The methods of modern bankers are little different from those same methods employed by the 
ancient moneylenders of Sumeria. The bankers, themselves, are crooks trying to swindle you out of your 
property, but they demand that you, yourself, must be honest and true to your word. They present you 
with a fraudulent contract to sign which stipulates how they are going to steal from you. And they expect 
you to keep the agreement, honestly and true, even though they, themselves, are neither honest nor true. 
The moneylenders demand that you honestly repay to them with interest what they have dishonestly 
defrauded from you. This is what modern moneylenders do but it was worse for the people of ancient 

Just as a modern banker can have the sheriff throw you into the street and seize your personal 
property, for the ancient Mesopotamians the prospect of slavery was an additional punishment. And so, 
Secret Fraud #3 of the Sumerian Swindle is also one of its best kept secrets. Although the moneylenders 
are all crooks who defraud you out of your possessions, they hypocritically demand that you, who are 
their victims, be honest and pay them your money. Bankers refuse to loan to thieving crooks because 
stealing money is what the bankers want to do. 

Life was good and profitable for the awilum [the Haves] as they gained more and more properties 
and goods through lending-at-interest. Great wealth tends to demand luxury. It became fashionable for 
people with wealth to buy the best of clothes and the fanciest of trinkets. 

Bartering for goods and equating goods to baskets of grain, began a system where trade could 
be accomplished between a variety of goods merely by equating them with an agreed upon amount of 
grain. And there was something else among all of the dusty trade goods in that dusty and dry country 
that was also desirable. That silver metal that was too soft for anything except ornaments for the wife and 
shiny cups and trinkets, had a trade value also. Silver was more rare than baskets of grain and had to be 


imported from distant lands. Because of its rarity, a small amount of silver could be traded for a large 
amount of grain or for goats or lands or houses. The trade ratio between this shiny metal and what people 
were willing to trade for it was quite high. 

Soon it was accepted that a purse containing a few shekels weight of silver was equal to huge 
piles of grain, numerous goats and sheep, oxen, fields of barley, houses and any other thing for which 
men and women bartered and traded. Thus, silver became a useful and relatively light weight method 
for exchanging goods. Although not a true form of money, silver became a type of commodity money. 
Silver was not valuable because of any intrinsic value in and by itself, but simply because men and women 
desired to have it. As a shiny commodity, it could be made into a ring or a bracelet. Or it could be an in- 
between trade good such as in trading a goat for some silver in one town and that same silver for some 
jars of beer in another town. And because it could be used to buy anything, it became the most desirable 
of all things because it could be traded for all things. In ancient Sumeria, silver could be traded for 

Shiny metals all came from outside of Mesopotamia. These imports of silver and gold were 
much in demand for jewelry and for decoration of the temples. Because of their relative scarcity when 
compared with other goods, it took many common commodities to trade for very small quantities of 
silver and gold. It was not that silver and gold had any value of their own, but their relative scarcity 
allowed small amounts of them to be traded for large amounts of other things. It was this scarcity in ratio 
to the abundance of other things that gave them their value. So the awilum [the Haves] who wore silver 
and gold rings and bracelets and broaches, displayed their wealth by the large amounts of grain and goats 
that would be needed to trade for such jewelry. A silver bracelet that had cost a hundred goats, was an 
impressive piece of shiny metal to every farmer who only owned a few goats. 

Although the basic system of commerce in Mesopotamia was barter, silver became in all respects 
the money of the ancient Near East. It was bartered in shekel weights and each shekel weighed about 
eight grams. Using these weights and measures, we know what the wages and prices were in those ancient 

Silver was a barter commodity that evolved into a kind of commodity money that could be used 
as a medium of exchange for everything. A farmer might refuse to trade his grain for a hundredweight 
of raw wool but he would gladly trade it for a few shekel weights of silver. He could then trade the silver 
for some new garments for his wife and for the new mortar and pestle and the baby goats that he really 

One lump of gold is of no use in commerce because the entire society cannot do business trading 
among themselves with one lump of gold. So, except between kings and bullion merchants and money 
changers who dealt in very large amounts, gold's rarity limited its usefulness as a type of money. Silver, 
however, is rare but not so rare that it wasn't plentiful enough to be used as a medium of exchange. 
Although one lump of gold is useless in business, a hundred lumps of silver begin to make the wheels 
of business turn as they were traded back and forth between buyers and sellers. Thus, silver became the 
basis of the monetary systems that developed in the ancient Near East. 

Silver, itself, is as worthless as sand; whatever value it has is given to it by the mutual agreement 
of men. As a metal, it lasted for ages and did not deteriorate like cloth or cooking oil or grain or even the 
land, itself. As long as it could be traded for anything in addition to acting as a form of money, it also 
became a method to store wealth. A ton of grain could be sold for silver. A parcel of land could be sold 
for silver. A slave could be sold for silver. A house could be sold for silver. And years later, when the grain 
was eaten, the land washed away by the river, the slave dead of old age and the house fallen down in an 
earthquake, the silver could be taken out of its hiding place and fresh grain, more land, a young slave and 
a new house could be bought with that silver. Silver, thus became a very valuable and useful commodity 
metal that was recognized very early as useful both as a medium of exchange and as a storage of wealth. 


Anything could be sold for silver and that silver could then buy anything else. Like a magical amulet, 
among a people who believed in magic and sorcery anything could be turned into silver and silver could 
be turned into anything. Silver was very much sought after by everyone who did any buying or selling in 
Mesopotamia. And those who did the buying and selling were the awilum [the Haves]. 

Great wealth also brought problems for the wealthy. Through the Sumerian Swindle, the awilum 
[Haves] began to acquire more land than they or their relatives could possibly farm. They acquired 
more foreclosed houses and fish ponds and boats and farm animals than they could possibly manage 
themselves. Human resentments being what they are, the moneylenders found it difficult to hire a farmer 
to work on the same field that they had swindled from him. Farmers who had lost their land to the grain 
and silver lenders preferred to start afresh by digging new irrigation ditches and cultivating new fields 
farther out in the desert. 

To solve his problem of too many foreclosed properties and untended flocks, the Ubaidian 
moneylenders began to hire laborers from the north of Mesopotamia. These Northerners (Subarians) 
were poor hunter- gatherers without farms or farming skills. In exchange for the usual wages of grain and 
oil, woven cloth and beer, they became the cheap immigrant laborers of pre -literate Mesopotamia. Using 
carefully controlled wages and strong-arm tactics from his foremen and enforcers, the awilum [Haves] 
were able to keep these people poor and hard at work. By the time of the arrival of the Sumerians (the 
Southerners), the word for "slave" had become "Subarian." 

The moneylenders began to betray their own people to foreigners by using foreigners as a means 
of securing ownership of the confiscated and foreclosed estates and properties. Although the archives 
name them as Subarians, a name which, by the time the Sumerians arrived in Mesopotamia, meant 
"slave", in fact these names were not ethnic or tribal references at all. The four directions used by the 
Mesopotamian people were North (Subar), South (Sumer), West (Amurru), and East (Elam) and the city 
of Babylon later became the center of it all. Thus, the names of these people that have come down to us 
indicate, not their ethnic or country of origin, but the direction from whence they came. 

As the moneylenders hired more and more Subarians from the north to work the land, the 
displaced and foreclosed Ubaidians were forced to seek refuge in the temples as servants or to hire 
themselves out as muskenum [Have-Not] laborers or as tenant farmers. Once proud landowning farmers 
who had been among the class of awilum [the Haves] were reduced to being landless paupers working for 
a daily bowl of barley porridge as the slaves of those who had lent them money. This led to a great deal of 
rebelliousness among these displaced workers and resentments toward the awilum [the Haves] and the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who had taken their farms and enslaved their children. Grumbling 
and threatening mobs of hungry muskenum [Have-Nots] were a growing threat to the moneylenders' 

The moneylenders found that they could increase their profits by importing large numbers of 
foreign workers from the Subar (the North) to work the lands. These poor Subarians did not ask so 
much for their pay since they were happy to merely have a bowl of barley porridge and a pot of beer 
for their labor. And if the money lending landlord gave them enough barley and beer for themselves 
and a wife then he could hire a devoted worker. Surrounded by cheap immigrant labor, the displaced 
Ubaidian farmers became more docile when they found to their great terror that if they did not work for 
the awilum [the Haves] as cheaply as the immigrants and without grumbling, then they would starve to 
death as the foreigner workers displaced them in the fields and in the brick yards. 

And so, huge tracts of land were worked both by foreign Subarians whom the moneylenders 
brought in from the North and by the impoverished Ubaidians who worked the estates of the temple and 
of the King. Thus, through money lending, the Udaidian people were defrauded of their homes and were 
displaced by hired immigrant labor. They became servants on their own lands. 

But how can less -developed and more primitive foreign people displace the more advanced 


citizens of a country? There are three stages to this displacement beginning with treason from above 
found in the greed of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . 

First, cheap foreign laborers are brought in by the moneylenders and landlords under the 
protection of their own high social status and their ownership of the land. The Sumerian people accepted 
the ancient swindle that the awilum [the Haves] can "do what they want with their own property." This 
attitude was also accepted by the landowners whose property was next to the foreign tenant farmers 
because they saw no danger in denying what they considered to be their own rights as property owners. 
This attitude was also accepted by the grumbling itinerant workers and debt-slaves because they 
didn't have any choice. They were the voiceless and powerless "Have-Nots." Thus, under cover of land 
ownership, the awilum [the Haves] moved foreign workers into the country to work cheaply and increase 
their profits. 

Second, when foreign people live as minorities among any population where they are 
outnumbered, they usually assume a very friendly and cheerful and helpful attitude toward the majority 
population in an effort to be accepted and to blend into society. Through continuing friendliness 
they tend to disarm the populace of distrust and resentment of their un-asked-for presence. Through 
persistent friendliness, the danger that they pose is forgotten. 

And third, once the foreign population has grown to a number that approaches a nearly equal or 
superior number, they give up their previously cheerful and friendly attitude and begin to assert a more 
aggressive and acquisitive character as they strive to take for themselves the land and properties that are 
owned or rented by the original population. This is subversion and disenfranchisement from below. This 
is something that the devious moneylenders recognized at a very early stage in their success as parasites. 
And this is a pattern that you will see is repeated over the next 7000 years right up to the present times. 

Unlike small tribal societies where personal loyalties are of paramount importance, the distance 
that great wealth created between the rich and the poor, gave the rich an impersonal interest in the poor. 
The Ubaidian moneylenders, shrewdly peering through their half-closed eyelids, swindled the land away 
and created a sub-class of the working poor from among their own people. To further enrich themselves, 
they hired the even cheaper Subarian laborers who undercut the pay scale of the people. As the Subarian 
workers were immigrated in, the wages that the awilum [the Haves] had to pay to their own people 
fell because of the competition from cheap labor. So, through foreign immigration, the social distance 
between the rich and the poor grew even wider and more impersonal. The Ubaidian land owners thought 
nothing of hiring foreigners while their own people either starved or worked for starvation wages, if that's 
what it took to increase their own wealth. 

Even though they had displaced their own people, the moneylenders, themselves, were not 
displaced since they were the property owners and the ones who promoted Subarian labor on the 
foreclosed and confiscated farms. In their greed, the moneylenders sold vast properties to a foreign 
people from the Iranian plateau. These people entered Mesopotamia from the South. They brought with 
them abundant silver to buy up the foreclosed properties from the Ubaidian moneylenders. And within 
one generation, as their children learned the ways of the Ubaidian culture, these people from the South 
(from the Sumer), became the masters of the land. They were called Sumerians. 

After a thousand years of usury, what property was not owned by the temples or the kings 
was owned by the moneylenders and a few independent farmers, all members of the social class of 
awilum [the Haves] . But if the moneylenders wanted to sell some land, to whom could they sell it? The 
moneylenders could not sell to the temples because the priests considered all land to be the property 
of the gods. The priests would accept the land as a free-will donation but they would not buy it. The 
moneylenders could not sell to the kings because the kings in those days were not working for themselves 
but were servants of the gods and protectors of the People. The kings also would want more land only if 
it was a gift. The moneylenders could not sell to other moneylenders or merchants because through their 


own swindles they all had as much property as they could manage and would only buy at a ridiculously 
low price. So, the Ubaidian moneylenders sold their foreclosed farms to people from outside of 
Mesopotamia, to foreigners from the south (Sumer) and east (Elam) who had silver in abundance. These 
people are known to us as Sumerians simply because they arrived in Mesopotamia from the south, from 
"the Sumer." 

The Sumerians were a much more intelligent people than the poor Subarians (the "northerners"). 
They knew a good thing when they saw it; and the agricultural abundance of Mesopotamia was what 
they wanted. The Sumerians were not interested in becoming the paid servants and the poor laborers of 
the Ubaidian landlords like the Subarians were. They had plenty of silver that they had dug out of the 
mountains of Elam (Iran). So, they traded their silver bangles and rings for the farms and fields that the 
awilum [the Haves] owned. 

The Ubaidian moneylenders made huge fortunes in land sales. But in the process, they betrayed 
their entire country to foreigners, not only by hiring cheap foreign labor as in the case with the poor 
Subarians from the north, but by actually selling the land to the Sumerians from the south. 

Of course, as the moneylenders saw it, they were the "owners" of the land and had a right to sell it 
to whomever they chose. But in actual fact, nearly every shekel of silver and every parcel of land that they 
had, was a result of stealing and defrauding their own people through the swindles of money lending and 
confiscation of collateral. They were robber barons selling off their loot. 

Because this system of lending-at-interest had existed long before the Sumerians arrived, they 
accepted this false idea without a second thought. After all, by the time the Sumerians arrived, the cities 
and towns of Mesopotamia were already over 3,000 years old. It appeared that the political and economic 
systems of Mesopotamia "had always been here". So, they accepted the entire system without question. 
The interest-on-a-loan, the Sumerians called "mas", a word used for both calves and interest. [ 3 ] So, this 
idea that interest could increase magically like the birth of a calf, concealed the Sumerian Swindle from 
its earliest inception. That the interest was a swindle was known only to the moneylenders. 

As the new land owners, the Sumerians brought in more and more of their relatives from the 
South until they became so numerous that the Ubaidian inhabitants of Mesopotamia entirely disappeared 
as an ethnic group and the land came under the complete domination and power of the Sumerians. 
These people greatly improved upon what the Ubaidians had developed and they produced inventions of 
their own. So, they are credited as being the founders of civilization. In addition to their many positive 
contributions to Mankind, they are the ones who developed the Sumerian Swindle to its highest level of 
fraud and passed it along to the modern world. 

With their keen intelligence, they could see the potential of what inventions the Ubaidians had. 
Since "necessity is the mother of invention", they transformed the crude scratches on clay into a robust 
system of writing and mathematical calculation. However, writing was not invented to record great 
poetry, epic myths or novels. Writing was not invented to write down prayers and songs in praise of the 
gods. For millennia, poetry and epic tales of the Gods and Heroes had been transmitted orally by the 
bards, storytellers and singers. So, there was no "necessity" to invent writing for that. What was needed 
was a method for recording the baskets of grain, the pots of beer, the numbers of ducks, and the various 
other commodities that were traded among the merchants and farmers. Writing was originally invented 
as an accounting tool. 

As early as 10,000 BC, the Ubaidians had used tokens of clay shaped as spheres, cones, rods and 
discs the size of small marbles for simple household and market bookkeeping. This system worked well 
enough for six thousand years in Mesopotamia, developing with a variety of squiggles on the sides of the 
disks to record numbers. [ 4 ] 

During those six thousand years, the Ubaidians built large mud-brick towns and towering mud- 
brick temples while not even one person knew how to read or write. Six thousand years is a long time to 


be illiterate. And before that, as hunter-gatherers, Mankind did quite well for several millions of years 
without reading or writing a single word. But to keep track of their pots of beer! Now that was something 
about which no one wanted to lose count! 

Around 3500 BC, it was discovered that those commodities that were represented by clay 
"things" could more easily be represented as scratches incised upon wet clay. Instead of having a heavy 
basketful of clay disks that represented the sacks of wool and pots of beer and baskets of grain that were 
owned by a temple or by a rich merchant, those commodities were found to be more efficiently recorded 
by a few squiggles and lines on a tablet of clay no bigger than one's open palm. With this invention, 
a thirty kilogram basket of clay disks and spheres was replaced by a one-eighth kilogram clay tablet 
with markings on it that could record a whole city-full of baskets filled with clay markers. Writing and 
numbers were a fantastic use of miniaturization four thousand years before there were any Japanese! 

When the Sumerians realized the potential power and usefulness of those scratches on wet clay, 
they improved upon them and created a complete writing and counting system known to us as cuneiform 
writing. [ Figure 2 ] Writing was invented, not by novelists and poets in need of expressing their artistic 
urges, but by the bean counters in need of keeping track of their beans. 

With the invention of writing, both time and distance were changed in relation to Mankind. 
Distances were made shorter and time was made irrelevant. The simple clay writing tablets of the 
Sumerians erased the destructive influence of time, itself, because even the faintest markings on the clay 
tablets could carry the written ideas across the millennia to where our present day scholars can read the 
very words of those ancient people. 

Think of the possibilities that opened up with the invention of writing! Contracts and treaties 
could be stored for eons without losing a single word of the original agreement. Distant kings could 
communicate with one another in words that could not be changed by either forgetfulness or distance. 
Without having to make perilous journeys, merchants could order exact amounts of goods with agreed 
upon prices from suppliers in distant countries. Contracts for the sale and rental of fields and farms with 
agreed upon payments and time schedules could be written down as proof of any business arrangement 
and these could be stored for centuries without losing a single word in the contract or the smallest grain 
of silver in the payment. With writing, the Sumerians were able to weld the small villages and towns into 
powerful states through the power of communication. And all of this was accomplished with marks made 
upon wet clay without a single television program or Hollywood movie to interfere with their cultural 

However great the invention of writing was for making complex civilizations possible, it was the 
people who controlled the writing who also controlled those complex civilizations. Since writing was 
actually invented by the merchants then the merchants were the ones who first and foremost benefited 
from writing. And if a merchant did not know how to read and write, he could always hire a scribe to do 
it for him. 

But here is a curious fact. However great an invention that writing is, how much attention do 
you give to it? Everyday, do you look at some written words and sigh great "oohs" and "ahhs" at the very 
wonderfulness of written words? Or do you think nothing of reading and writing what-so-ever? When 
you want to read or write something, you merely read and write. Don't you take for granted the reading- 
and-writing because you have been familiar with it for most of your life? I am setting up a trap here, so be 

The same can be said of the invention of the wheel. This simple device, which was also invented in 
Mesopotamia, carries the entire modern world. We would not have an industrial or even an efficient rural 
society without the wheel to drive our vehicles and turn our machinery. But do you stop in awe and stare 
in wonder every time an automobile drives by and point your finger in excitement at the rolling wheels 
and say, "Oh, look! A wheel! Look! A whole bunch of wheels!" Of course not! Wheels are so common! 


And they have been around since before we were born. So, we take them for granted as an ordinary part 
of Life. I am setting up a trick here, so be careful. 

That which has existed since before we were born, is something that everybody takes for granted. 
Automobiles, glass windows, forks and spoons, telephones and a million other items are examples of 
things to which we don't give a second thought since they have "always been here." We all grew from a 
baby to an adult with these inventions all around us. Right? Now, be careful, I am setting up a trick here. 

But you know from your study of history, that automobiles, glass windows, telephones, etc., have 
not really been here forever. You may even know from your modern collection of trivial information the 
names of the people who invented these things and even the dates when they were invented. But what 
could the ancient Mesopotamians know about the inventions of their own people? Literally, they could 
know nothing at all because all of their inventions were made before writing was developed. 

Thanks to the archeologists, we know that between the first small villages of the Ubaidians and 
the beginnings of genuine civilization with the Sumerians, an amazing 6,000 years had gone by. Six 
thousand years of people sowing and reaping, raising their families and dieing and not a one of them 
being able to read or write! I am setting up a trick here. So be careful and think about this a bit. 

In relation to your own life, think about your own country and its history. Think about your 
own relatives and your own family and put this into perspective . If your parents are still living, do you 
remember your grandparents? What about your great-grand-parents? Can you remember them? Aside 
from some old photographs, what can you really say about your great-grand-parents? And certainly there 
is very little if anything that you can remember about your great-great-grand-parents since they died 
before you were born. And what can you know about your distant relatives from a hundred years ago? 
And even though you can read and write, what can you say about your relatives who lived five thousand 
years ago? Five thousand years ago you had living relatives! You exist, so certainly they did too. But 
there is absolutely nothing that you can say about any of them, dust as they are, blowing in the wind and 
imaginary spooks conjured up in your own mind. Be careful. There is a trick coming up here. 

"Time is money" or so say the modern capitalists and financiers who daily use both time and 
money to increase their profits and betray the world. So, of course, it is important to understand time if 
you want to understand the people who use time to swindle you out of your money. 

Five thousand years is really a very short time. But to modern people at the beginning of the 21 st 
Century AD, five thousand years seems to be ancient and remote. Because everything changes so much 
in modern times, we tend to view a hundred years ago as quaintly antique while 5000 years ago seems 
impossibly ancient. Five thousand years is beyond the modern human's comprehension. However, it is 
important to understand why a few thousand years is really a very short time because as I show you the 
secrets of the Jews and moneylenders, you must understand that long periods of time are not a barrier to 
conspiracies such as this. 

If you look at the entire known universe and put all of that time into a ratio of a single calendar 
year, you can begin to get an idea of how relatively recent is five thousand years ago. That is, if you count 
the very beginning of the universe as starting on January 1st and the end of that calendar year as ending 
today as you are reading this, you can get an excellent idea of the relatively short time that five thousand 
years really is. 

Beginning with the Big Bang of expanding gases on January 1st, the earth didn't form until 
September 14 more than three-quarters of the way through the year. The oldest fossils of green algae 
and bacteria weren't laid down until October 9 and the first photosynthetic plants were formed by about 
November 12. And by December 1st, oxygen began to infuse the Earth's atmosphere. The first worms 
began to form by December 16. The first fishes began by December 19. The first trees and reptiles began 
about December 23 and the first dinosaurs by December 24. The first mammals began by December 26 
and the first birds by December 27. The dinosaurs become extinct by December 28. And by December 29 


the first primates evolve. And by December 31 the first humans appear by about 10:30 PM. 

By 1 1:00 PM on December 31, people learn to use stone tools. And by 1 1:46 PM we learn to use 
fire. By 11:59 PM, the hunters of Europe begin drawing pictures on their cave walls. By 11:59 PM and 20 
seconds, agriculture is invented. And by 11:59 PM and 50 seconds, recorded history at Sumeria begins. 
[ 5 ]And thus, as a ratio of Man's life on earth against the age of the universe, all of our recorded history 
since writing was invented has taken place within just the last ten seconds. But of course, this is just a 
ratio and in no way can make one comprehend even small lengths of time such as a mere 5000 years. I 
am setting up a trick here, so be careful. 

It is important to realize how very recent a time span five thousand years is and to not be deceived 
into assuming that People are any different today than they were then. In all of that time we have 
invented into our daily lives both material things and intellectual ideas that are just as useful to us today 
as they were to the people of five thousand years ago. 

The wheel was invented five thousand five hundred years ago, and what would we do without 
it? Because wheels are such ancient technology, should we throw them aside and never ride bicycles or 
automobiles or trains because as "modern people" such ancient relics are too old for us? How absurd! 

And writing was invented five thousand years ago, but since you are reading this, you know that 
such an ancient invention is too useful to do without. How could we carry on our civilized lives without 
reading and writing? 

We are really quite young, we Human Beings. The span of our lives against the vastness of 
Creation is very small. The whirling and wheeling of the galaxies in limitless space do little for us and 
certainly take no heed of our existence. It is the life that we lead in the present moment that means 
anything at all. Of what use is it to know the distance to Alpha Centauri or the speed of light around a 
black hole? None of this matters at all in our daily lives. But how fast a wheel spins that carries us along a 
freeway, or what time the train arrives to carry us to work, means quite a lot because these things in real 
time and in real space directly impact our very lives. I am setting up a trick here, so be careful. 

Can you begin to understand the incredible time frames that we are dealing with? Your inability 
to say anything about your own relatives of five thousand years ago is no different than the problem that 
the Mesopotamians had in saying anything about their own relatives. In fact, you probably know more 
than they did since genealogy and photography and archeology and writing have preserved enough that 
you can at least make a guess. 

So, let's solve the problem of the tricks that I have set. In trying to remember your distant 
relatives, you can now understand the impossible problem of trying to remember people whom you have 
never met. Furthermore, by taking for granted the man-made inventions in our daily lives, we tend to 
forget that these things are here today but they were not always here . Were wheels always here? No. Were 
telephones always here? No. Was writing always here? No. But it is easy to take them for granted because 
they are so familiar in our daily lives. We don't think twice about seeing a spoon or a fork or a pair of 
chopsticks, an automobile or an airplane or a book because they have been here since before we were 
born . We take them for granted. So, here is the trick. 

Understand this about the Sumerian Swindle: It was not always here . The Ubaidians of 5000 BC 
invented it and the Sumerians took it up and increased its power a trillion fold. The Sumerian Swindle 
is an ancient secret that modern scientists totally fail to understand and yet it has already been used 
throughout history to destroy entire nations and extinguish the lives of millions of people. This ancient 
Sumerian Swindle is being used today by the Jews and financiers and bankers to destroy entire countries 
and swindle generations of people and to create despotic tyrannies that crush freedom, enslave Mankind 
and throw down God. The Sumerian Swindle has that kind of power. It has that kind of power and yet 
modern Man takes it for granted as a "normal" part of Life and so allows the Swindle to prosper. 

It was invented in Mesopotamia, yet it is overlooked by archeology, misunderstood by politicians 


and invisible to the common man. The secrets of the Sumerian Swindle have been closely guarded for 
over seven thousand years and are still being held in the greedy and power-mad hands of some of the 
most evil fiends ever to have walked the earth. 

This super secret invention of the Ubaidians and Sumerians was not nuclear weapons or jet 
fighter planes, nothing as amazing as that. The super-secret Sumerian Swindle is quite simply the loaning 
of money at interest . Take care! There's a trick here. This boring subject of lending- at- interest has created 
and destroyed individual people and entire nations for the past 7000 years. Hundreds of millions of 
people have starved to death, wars have ravaged the nations of Mankind, diseases have spread, hundreds 
of millions of people have been enslaved and worked to death, entire nations have arisen to great heights 
of culture and have been laid waste with fire and pestilence - all because of the Sumerian Swindle. With 
such power inflicted upon us from ancient times, how can we not want to understand the very thing 
that destroys our families, robs us of our wealth, steals our jobs, forecloses our homes, pushes us into 
wars, betrays our country and enslaves us? You - O Modern Man - might think that you understand the 
modern world because you take the modern world for granted. But the modern world is in the grip of an 
ancient evil that arose long, long ago in the land of Sumeria. The Sumerian Swindle is practiced today by 
every thieving banker, perfidious Jew and treasonous financier, but it has not always been here . 


Chapter 4 
The Sumerians and the Beginning of Civilization 

During the three thousand years before the birth of Christ there flourished in Mesopotamia one 
of the most enduring and significant civilizations which the world has known. Its chronological extent 
very much exceeded that of the ancient Hebrews, while the mass of texts which survive are at least twenty 
times longer than the whole of the Old Testament. [ 6 ] This mass of texts from Mesopotamia were buried 
for 5,000 years beneath the rubble of their abandoned and destroyed cities. Written on clay tablets that 
were baked into impervious bricks, the cuneiform writings of these long vanished civilizations were not 
translated until the later part of the nineteenth and the beginnings of the twentieth centuries A.D. These 
ancient documents contain the proof that the Jews have been telling lies for the past 2,500 years. 

Modern Western civilization has been very much affected by the fables of the Jews simply because 
we have not had access to the original cuneiform records and have had to rely upon the fraudulent Jewish 
writings. When you only get one side of a story, what else can you do except believe the story for lack 
of any other view? And so, with their multitudinous prevarications and forgeries, the Jewish version of 
history has very much colored and twisted our ideas about the people and events in the Ancient Near 
East. It is only through the modern work of archeologists, that a truer picture of those ancient times has 

Long before the insignificant kingdoms of Judah and Israel were invented, great empires were 
established in the Middle East. The first of these were, of course, Sumeria and Egypt, beginning sometime 
before 3000 BC. It should be noted that what we know of those ancient times, has only been discovered 
in the past 150 years or so. Although the Old Persian script had been deciphered by 1840 AD, it has been 
the accumulated knowledge found not only in the Assyrian and Sumerian royal archives but also in the 
stone inscriptions and papyrus writings of the Egyptians that give us a more balanced picture of those 
times, a picture that is far more accurate than can be found in the slanders and fictions that the Jews 
wrote in the Old Testament. Digging through the ancient rubble of destroyed cities, the archeologists of 
today have been able to piece together the history of those long- vanished civilizations using the actual 
records left by those people. And that history is very much different than what is found in the plagiarized, 
Old Testament myths of the Jews. We must listen to what those ancient people had to say about 
themselves before considering the fables of the upstart Jews and their self-serving, mythological fantasies. 

Although the peoples whom we call the Ubaidians first began the Mesopotamian Culture, the 
real credit for establishing civilization goes to the Sumerians. Because their agglutinative language group 
resembled that of the peoples from south of the Caspian Sea, they may have originally emigrated from 
that area. But according to their own tradition they came from the South. In the Sumerian language, 
"subar" means "north", "elam" means "east", "ammuru" means "west" and "sumer' means "south". And so, 
as a people from the South, they were called Sumerians. 

They entered Mesopotamia gradually sometime between 3200 and 3100 BC when the open sea 
of the Persian Gulf was 250 kilometers (155 miles) further north than it is today. They soon became 
the masters of the entire region. Modern archeologists claim that they probably came from the Iranian 
plateau and so would have an Aryan origin. The records that they left show that the Sumerians were an 
intelligent people with common sense and a pragmatic view of life. They prized wealth and possessions, 
farms filled with rich harvests and many cattle, successful hunting in the outback, bursting granaries and 


nets full offish. Their many legal documents show that they were very conscious of their personal rights 
and were not shy about dragging into the law courts those who encroached upon those rights. And their 
literature shows how much they valued honor and recognition and prestige and pre-eminence. What 
they brought to the existing culture of the Ubaidian land-owners and Subarian workers was an acute 
intelligence that allowed them to take the pre-existing inventions and ideas and improve upon them. 

The earliest names of Mesopotamian kings were Sumerian names. They so dominated every 
aspect of Mesopotamian life that the Sumerian language became the only language spoken. And they are 
credited with the invention of writing since it was during their dominance that this technology achieved 
its full potential from a mere accounting method to a fully functioning technology for transmitting and 
recording human thought. [ 7 ] 

The entire Mesopotamian riverine region is deficient in most of the basic materials of civilized 
existence, such as hard timber, stone, and metal ores. And yet the Sumerians turned an agricultural 
community whose only three assets were water, sunshine and mud into an advanced and literate culture. 

[ 8 ] 

They devised such useful tools, skills, and techniques as the potter's wheel, the wagon wheel, 
the plow, the sailboat, the arch, the vault, the dome, casting in copper and bronze, riveting, brazing 
and soldering, sculpture in stone, engraving and inlay. Their cuneiform system of writing on clay was 
borrowed by other peoples and used all over the Near East for some two thousand years. Almost all that 
we know of the early history of western Asia comes from the thousands of clay documents inscribed in 
the cuneiform script developed by the Sumerians and excavated by archeologists only in the past hundred 
and fifty years. [ 9 ] Although the majority of early archeology digs were commenced for the purpose of 
verifying Biblical histories, it soon became apparent from both physical artifacts and cuneiform and 
hieroglyphic translations that the vast majority of Old Testament stories, that is, those Jewish fables that 
were not complete lies, were inaccurate at best. 

This past hundred and fifty years of archeological digging around, marks a period of 
enlightenment in our modern world. Until the archeological remains of the Sumerians and the later 
Assyrians were dug out of the Mesopotamian dust, our only knowledge of those ancient people was 
what could be gleaned from a few paragraphs of excoriations and curses written about them in the Old 
Testament. What the West has known about a culture whose chronological extent much exceeded that of 
the Hebrew peoples by several thousands of years, was close to zero. [ 10 ] 

The Jews tell their stories from the religious bias that the cultures of the Sumerians and 
Babylonians and Assyrians and Egyptians were evil, while the culture of the Jews is pure and good. 
But rather than trust what the lying Jews have to say on the subject, we can read for ourselves from 
the cuneiform clay tablets what the Sumerians, Babylonians and Assyrians wrote. This will help you to 
understand the great lies and evil frauds that the Jews have perpetuated upon all of Mankind in this 
essential area of human faith and knowledge of God and history of Man. 

Those Readers who are atheists should be warned that just because this book shows the Jews to 
be liars, frauds and swindlers, does not mean that religion, itself, is false. And those Readers who are 
religious should be warned that this book in no way attacks your belief in God. But you will find that 
what you believe will be greatly altered and made much stronger even as your views undergo a change in 

It may seem odd to the casual Reader to begin a history of the Betrayers of Mankind with an essay 
on religion. But in order to understand the power that religion had on the ancient people as well as its 
uses in the modern political landscape, this is where we must begin. Please understand, especially you 
readers who have religious beliefs, that this history in no way is an attack against religious faith or belief 
in God. You will see from what follows that there is a God, and He is good, but that there is no god in 


The Gods of Sumeria 

For the Sumerians, everything good and holy began at the city of Eridu located near the Persian 
Gulf Although the Ubaidians founded Eridu, it was the Sumerians who began their culture there. It was 
the Sumerians who wrote down the ancient stories and myths that had been committed to memory for 
three thousand years and thereby became part of the culture of the Sumerians. So, it was written that all 
culture came forth from Eridu. 

Modern people have a variety of religions, atheistic ideas, agnostic ideas as well as no ideas at all 
about religion. To a modern Reader, it may seem odd to think about this, but you must understand that 
all of the ancient peoples were very religious. All of them believed in the gods . Regardless of whether 
you, yourself, believe in God or not, you must understand this. There were no atheists among the ancient 

They did not have our modern scientist's views of the universe, scientists who can see distant 
galaxies floating in empty space but who cannot see God. They did not have a modern scientist's 
quantum mechanical views of the universe, scientists who can theorize subatomic particles vibrating in 
yet more empty sub-atomic space but who still cannot see God. They did not have the modern politician's 
view that their actions were immune to any power outside of their own abilities to cajole and persuade. 
To the ancient peoples, God and the gods were everywhere evident, controlling and always observant of 
the actions of Man. Religion was the very basis of Sumerian life and everything in their society revolved 
around their religious beliefs. 

The Sumerians asked the simple questions of religion such as: "Where did Mankind come from?" 
They did not have modern scientists lying to them and telling them that they had descended from 
monkeys. They looked about and honestly answered this eternal question and said, "Obviously, we were 
created by the gods." 

They asked other questions such as, "What is the purpose of Life?" They did not have 
Communists and Capitalists and atheist Jews telling them that they were only animals who would do 
best by serving the corporate state as slaves and as mindless consumers of manufactured products. They 
answered this question with the only answer that made sense: "The purpose of Life is to serve God." 
Regardless of what the slandering rabbis claim about them, this and this alone was the primary guiding 
point for all of the various religions of Sumeria. 

From the poorest laborer to the mightiest king, everyone in Sumerian society began and ended 
their daily life in prayer to the gods, aware of mortal Man's humble purpose in Life. For what other 
purpose was Man created but to serve the gods? What power could a puny and mortal man have against 
the thunderclap, the burning sun, the fierce wind, against disease and, especially, against the cold 
inevitability of death? The Sumerians knew the answer to these questions and practiced their lives as a 
daily devotion to the gods. 

In the modern world we try to make clear-cut distinctions between the various categories of 
fortune-telling, magic, religion, theology, and ethics. Such distinctions are not always easy to maintain 
even in the modern world, and in ancient times such distinctions would have been almost meaningless. 
In the ancient world all these elements were parts of one great whole. [ n ] The transit of the sun, moon 
and stars, the rains and winds, the heat of the day and the cold of the night, were all a part of the vast 
fabric of Reality with which the Sumerians built their religion and their civilization. As members of one 
great entity, they communed with their gods through devotion, prayers and sacrifice; and they received 
answers to their prayers through dreams, omens, direct conversations with God, and through priestly 

A modern Reader may scoff at the gods. But whether you believe in a god or not, is really not 


important to this history. What is vitally important for you to understand is that the Ancient People, each 
and every one of them, believed in the gods. To understand them and their culture and what their impact 
upon our own modern societies is, it is vital to understand what they believed. 

I will just briefly touch upon the gods of the Sumerians here as a background reference only. I will 
also tell some of the ancient secrets that have been hidden from modern scholars and scientists until now. 
Not wanting to bore the average atheistic reader or the average ignorant modern scientist or to horrify 
the average religious reader, this will be just a short survey. It is important to have an idea of the religion 
of the Sumerians of ancient times and their various gods so that you are not deceived by the lies of the 
Jews or by the idiocy of the modern scientists. 

Firstly, the Sumerians had an intimate knowledge of the human aura. In more recent times, this 
spiritual radiation is often seen in old paintings of saints and gods. The human aura can be seen in others 
only by those who already perceive it in themselves. One of the earliest symbols for this radiant energy 
is found in what is today known as the Maltese cross. [ Figure 3 1 The Maltese cross represents a man or 
woman standing with outstretched arms with their holy aura glowing from off their body. 

The Maltese Cross occurred as a religious symbol as early as the Jemdet Nasr period (-2900 BC) 
in precisely the form in which it is met with in Christian art. [ 12 ] Although the later Christians would 
accept this ancient design as a symbol of the cross, its representation of the radiance of the human spirit 
was recognized by the Sumerians 3000 years before Jesus taught about the Holy Spirit. They Sumerians 
could radiate and perceive their personal auras so it was not a great leap of faith to realize that their gods 
were similarly endowed. 

As the ancient people knew, the very most important of the Eight Essentials of Life is air to 
breathe. Without air, men die in only a few minutes. The gods, themselves, as living gods, obviously also 
had to breathe. So, the most important of all the gods was the god of the air, the god of the living breath, 
the god whose breath permeated the Universe and gave life to gods and men. 

From the earliest records, Enlil is known as "the father of the gods," "the king of heaven and 
earth," "the king of all the lands." Kings and rulers boasted that it was Enlil who had given them the 
kingship of the land, who had made the land prosperous for them, who had given them all the lands 
to conquer by his strength. It was Enlil who pronounced the king's name and gave him his scepter and 
looked upon him with a favorable eye. When we analyze the hymns and myths, we find Enlil glorified as 
a most friendly, fatherly deity who watched over the safety and well-being of all humans and particularly, 
of course, over the inhabitants of Sumeria. 

The deep veneration of the Sumerians for the god Enlil and his temple, the Ekur in Nippur, can be 
sensed in a hymn which reads in part as follows: 

"Enlil, whose command is far-reaching, whose word is holy, the lord whose pronouncement is 
unchangeable, who forever decrees destinies, whose lifted eye scans the lands, whose lifted beam 
searches the heart of all the lands; Enlil who sits broadly on the white dais, on the lofty dais, who 
perfects the decrees of power, lordship, and princeship. The earth-gods bow down in fear before 
him. The heaven-gods humble themselves before him 

"The city (Nippur), its appearance is fearsome and awesome. The unrighteous, evil oppressor, . . . 
, the informer, the arrogant, the agreement- violator, He does not tolerate their evil in the city. The 
great net ... He does not let the wicked and evil-doer escape its meshes." 

Such goodness and positive Virtue among the Sumerians belies the slanders and imprecations 
of the lying rabbis toward these ancient peoples. The Sumerians valued the righteous, the good, the 
trustworthy, the humble, and the honest. And they abhorred the wicked and the evil-doer. Remember 


this because it has vital importance to this history. The Sumerians were a holy and virtuous people. 
The gods preferred the ethical and moral over the unethical and immoral, according to the 
Sumerian sages. Practically all the major deities of the Sumerian pantheon are extolled in their hymns 
as lovers of the good and the just, of truth and righteousness. Indeed, there were several deities who had 
the supervision of the moral order as their main function: for example, the sun-god, Utu (who was later 
named Shamash). Another deity, the Lagash goddess named Nanshe , also played a significant role in the 
sphere of man's ethical and moral conduct. She is described in one of her hymns as the goddess 

". . .Who knows the orphan, who knows the widow, knows the oppression of man over man, is 
the orphan's mother, Nanshe, who cares for the widow. Who seeks out justice for the poorest. The 
queen brings the refugee to her lap, finds shelter for the weak." [ 13 ] 

And so, these wicked evil-doers are listed in the Sumerian literature as "the unrighteous, evil 
oppressors, the informer (malicious gossip), the arrogant, the agreement-violator, the oppressor of 
orphans and widows, the oppressor of the poor and the weak, the refugee from war." In other words, what 
the religious scriptures of the Sumerians preached was Goodness. Once again, the actual words of the 
Sumerians show what slandering liars the rabbis are as they have vilified these people throughout history. 

Although the Sumerians recognized that their gods had certain physical attributes or that they 
were represented by special totems or symbols, none of these gods were as puny and weak and non- 
existent as the modern Jewish historians make them out to be. Rather, the gods of the Sumerians were 
powerful and all pervading. The slanders that are used by the Jewish writers are bald attempts to make 
the Jewish god appear to be mighty and the gods of other people to appear as myths or as cows or as 
crescent moons. But the gods of the Sumerians were actually more powerful than and certainly no less 
powerful than the god that the Jews later claimed for their own. The Sumerian god, Enlil, was described 
in the cuneiform scriptures as: 

" Enlil , to bring forth the seed of the land from the ground, 
"Hastened to separate heaven from earth, 
"Hastened to separate earth from heaven. . .."[ 14 ] 

The seed of the ground was Humankind as well as the growing plants. On other tablets it is written that: 

"Heaven was created of its own accord. 
"Earth was created of its own accord. 
"Heaven was an abyss, earth was an abyss." [ 15 ] 

This not only supercedes the Old Testament plagiarisms of the Jews by more than three thousand 
years, but also shows an understanding of the Universe that is in no way less advanced than the latest 
modern theories and observations of astrophysics. Indeed, the Universe truly is a great abyss. The earth 
was a great abyss before Mankind populated it and it is still today huge in comparison to the size of a 
man. It did not take a telescope orbiting in space for the Sumerians to understand this. 

Just as Human Beings build civilization using a division of labor within a social hierarchy, so too 
did the Sumerians envision their gods as having similar attributes. Thus, there was not one all-powerful 
god who did all the work of maintaining the Universe but, rather, there were multitudes of various 
gods who did their own work while being under the rule of one supreme god. Much as human society 
functioned with kings and priests giving orders to their subalterns who in turn passed along these orders 
to those lower on the hierarchy, so too did the gods of the Sumerians operate. 


In the third millennium BC, a canonical list of the gods totaled almost two thousand gods. Later, 
the Sumerians estimated that there were 3600 gods (sixty times sixty). But they were not as weak and 
non-existent as the Jews claimed them to be. 

The holy family of the gods all descended from the sky. The sky god, Anu, controls the heavens 
and is above everything. His holy city was Uruk. He had two consorts, Ki and Nammu . With his consort, 
Ki the Earth goddess, they produced Enlil the air god whose holy city was Nippur. Nippur was also the 
holy city of Ninlil the air goddess. Enlil and Ninlil produced Nanna (later called Sin) the Moon god, 
whose holy city was Ur. 

The other consort of the sky god was Nammu, the goddess of the watery deep. They produced 
Enki, the god of wisdom and god of eternally flowing waters. His city was Eridu. His consort, the Reed 
Lady Ningikuga, produced Ningal, the Moon Goddess whose holy city also was Ur. 

So, the Moon God and the Moon Goddess both took up residence in the temples of Ur. From 
their union was produced Shamash the sun god whose holy cities were both Sippar and Larsa, and 
Inanna the goddess of love whose holy city was Uruk. Thus Uruk boasted the great temples to the highest 
god, Anu, and the goddess of love Inanna (later known as Lshtar). 

The sun god, Shamash , in his daily course across the heavens, dispelled all darkness and could see 
all the works of man: thus, by being "the one from whom no secrets are hid" he was the god of justice, 
and it is he who was later portrayed on the stele of Hammurabi as symbolically handing over the just 
laws to that king. Shamash , the god of justice, is commonly represented with the rod and ring, denoting 
straightness and completeness, that is, righteousness and justice. Other deities occasionally carry the rod 
and ring showing that they, too, represented righteousness and justice. The principal cities with which 
Shamash was associated were Sippar and Larsa. [ 16 ] 

Anu was the most ancient sky god and originally the chief of all the gods. But over the millennia, 
his attributes had been absorbed by Enlil and later by Marduk in Babylon and even later by Asshur in 
Assyria. Inanna was the Sumerian goddess of love and later became lshtar to the Semites, represented by 
the planet Venus as the goddess of love and the goddess of war. 

In their well-organized heavenly government, there was a patron deity for every profession 
such as a god of brick making and a god of brewing. Dumuzi was a god of dates and date palms and a 
shepherd god to whom the date farmers gave devotion. Ansud was a grain goddess. Enbilulu was a god 
of the rivers. Enkimdu was a farmer god. Geshtinanna was the goddess of the grapevine and of wine 
making. Gibil was a god of fire to whom metal smiths prayed. Gula was the goddess of medicine and 
physicians. Haya was the god of the storehouse. Kabata was the god of mud bricks and of brick makers. 
Lahar was a cattle god. Nanshe was the goddess of fish and birds and was beseeched by the fishermen. 
Shakan was the god of goats, gazelles and wild asses, to whom hunters would give offerings. Sumugan 
was also a god of wild animals and cattle to whom the herdsmen prayed. Uttu was the goddess of 
clothing to whom weavers and garment makers offered prayers. Sin was the Moon God, who moved in 
the mysterious darkness and was the patron deity of the merchant-moneylenders. The Moon God was 
considered to be more powerful than the Sun God because the moon can be seen both in the day and in 
the night. So, the Sun God was born to the Moon God and Moon Goddess. 

But above them all was the sky god, Anu , to whom all things under heaven and earth bowed 
because his command was "the foundation of heaven and earth". And as the ultimate source of all 
authority, Anu was associated with the king, the highest authority on earth whom he designated as ruler. 


It should be noted here that the Sumerians practiced something which gave them great bliss 
and spiritual knowledge through the meditation technique of the mantra. Through the repetition of the 
name of God - in this manner, "An, An, An, An" - the Sumerian priests and people found both spiritual 
sustenance and food for the soul. They found peace and tranquility of mind and happiness in the heart. 


And so, the name of the original god of Mankind was Anu and certainly not Tehovah . 

Also, this An mantra is used to this very day as the Om syllable - in this manner, Om, Om, Om, 
Om. Try it and you will like it. God is no farther away than the repetition of His name. And though He 
has many names, more is the pity for those who do not know even one of them. But such are the modern 
day politicians, financiers and Jews! 

The undisputed religious center of Sumeria was the city of Nippur where Enlil's temple of Ekur 
was located. Ekur was the paramount shrine in all of Sumeria and tradition points to Nippur as the place 
of assembly for the "election" of the supreme ruler. The king was nominated for office by his own city- 
god in an assembly of gods meeting at Nippur. These gods were represented by the chief priests from 
the temples of Sumeria. Nippur was never directly involved in the petty squabbles that characterized 
the relationships between the other cities of Sumeria, nor was it the titular capital of any dynasty. But 
possession of the holy city of Nippur entitled a Babylonian king to adopt titles that implied at least 
theoretical hegemony over the country. This power over kings was later usurped by Babylon and its god, 
Marduk [ 18 ] 

The Sumerians were a happy people and the bliss and joy they found in worshipping their gods 
clearly shows on the statues of their priests and worshippers who all wear smiles of bliss and have eyes 
filled full of awe. [ Figure 4 1 But there was a Great Evil rampant in the Land of the Two Rivers. This Evil 
was intent upon changing the contented smiles and awe-filled eyes of these first civilized people into 
grimaces of hard labor and eyes full of tears. This evil was found in the hearts of those who practiced the 
Sumerian Swindle. 

The Temple 

Most of the propaganda that you hear in modern times about the paganism and the primitive 
religious sensibilities of the ancient peoples are mere slanders by the Jews and their Christian flunkies 
and the maniac Muslims. The Jews always slander and belittle all other religions in order to make the 
dwarfish Jews appear great. Giving other religions a bad name, is one of the basic Talmudic teachings 
of the rabbis. By destroying the Truth in all other religions, the rabbis try to make the lies of Judaism 
triumphant. And the Christians merely express their arrogance and Jewified stupidity by following the 
Jewish example, as do the Muslims. 

Both the Christians and Muslims also are guilty of the genocide of what they refer to as "pagan" 
cults. So, whether the archeologists are Jews, Christians or Muslims, they all have an inherent and biased 
defect in their understanding of what they dig up in the five thousand year-old cities of Mesopotamia. 

Although they, themselves, are godless and atheistic perverts, modern scientists scoff at the 
ancient peoples who worshipped toward images of their gods. Calling them "idol worshippers", these 
blind fools have no god and no belief of their very own. Instead, the scientists idolize themselves and 
worship themselves alone in the belief that they are their own gods and need nothing outside of their 
own conceit. But an ancient person humbly worshipping at the feet of a statue and adoring the god 
within that statue, is certainly far superior to a modern scientist or atheist who worships his own image 
in a mirror. 

For these reasons, modern people are misinformed about the actual cultural value of newly 
discovered artifacts. Many of these artifacts have been on museum display since Assyriology was first 
officially established as a science in 1812 AD [ 19 ] and the scientists of today still do not know what some 
of those artifacts represent. This is not surprising when the scientists, themselves, are either Jews who 
want to tear down all religions except their own; or Muslims and Christians who want to elevate their 
own religion above all others; or merely scientists who are atheists and blind to the religious experience 
and to religious expression in general. So, we must take a fresh look at some of the secrets that have 


been purposely hidden or ignorantly misperceived for so many centuries by those lying Jews, deluded 
Christians and maniac Muslim "scholars". 

For a Sumerian, the temple was the center of Sumerian society quite simply because God was 
the center of Sumerian society. The Sumerians did not pray to some wind god or fire god, as the modern 
scientists and the Jews would have you believe, but rather, they were praying to God, Himself, the highest 
power of which they could conceive. These gods appeared to the Sumerian People in the wind or the fire 
or whatever physical manifestation seemed imbued with holy power. But they did not pray to the wind or 
the fire, they prayed to the god who was within the wind and the fire. 

"O Shamash, king of heaven and earth, judge above and below; 

Light of the gods, guide of Mankind; who judges the cases of the great gods! 

I turn to you; seek you out." [ 20 ] 

Such prayers to the sun god transmit through the millennia the heart-felt and fervent piety of 
these people. They were praying to God. But the Jews and the ignorant Christians and Muslims would 
have you believe that these people were praying to the sun. Shamash the sun god rises and sets every 
day. But his power was not restricted merely to an orb in the sky because Shamash radiated to all parts of 
heaven and earth. It is a great defect in modern perceptions to take the dull scientific view that the sun is 
an exploding sphere of nuclear gases held together by its own gravity. A scientist may say this and then 
brush aside the fantastically amazing reality of the blindingly immaculate sun but his explanation would 
not make Shamash any less awesome. Modern people are being mislead by science if they throw away 
the wonderfulness of our universe only to accept the boringly dull descriptions of science. With your 
own eyes, you can see the amazing wonder of the sun. Why ignore this incredible beauty and power by 
sticking your head into a scientific textbook explanation? The mystical view of the universe is observed 
through your own mind, heart and soul - the most subtle, insightful and precise of instruments - and 
not through a telescope. 

If the Sumerians were farmers, they prayed to a storm god because it was upon the rain clouds 
that their crops and herds depended and it was from the wind and storms that their crops could be 
destroyed and their herds scattered. Because the storm god also delivered his water by the rivers, then the 
water god was also vitally important. And of course, one couldn't very well ignore the sun god because 
only with his all-seeing eye could the world be illumined and the crops grow. So, the People prayed to 
these manifestations of our great and beautiful world because everything in Creation is essential to one's 
life and prosperity and happiness, just as it is today. Everything in creation is holy. 

Without help from the gods, Man is nothing. The Sumerians did not have modern scientists 
telling them that they were ignorant fools for believing in non-existent gods because the Sumerians 
could see with their own eyes the beauty and majesty of the holy sun rising above another day of Life for 
them. They could smell the sweet nectar of the air; and they could feel the buoyant and silken majesty of 
the water; and they could feel their own spiritual Life Force radiating as an aura around them. They had 
no Communist Jews telling them that they were nothing but animals because the Sumerians could see 
with their own eyes the human spiritual radiance within the love of their wives and the laughter of their 
children. They could see the holy aura radiating from their holy men and priests. And when the spirit 
left the body of a loved-one at death, they could see it hovering about and returning to either haunt or to 
consol them. Our modern scientists are the real fools who blindly cannot observe and appreciate these 
things that are evident even to a child. 

Beneath the great sky, the Sumerians were a happy people. The fertile plains of Sumeria gave them 
food. The mud bricks of the earth and the reeds of the marshes gave them shelter. With hard work and 
the blessings of the gods for good crops, good cattle, and good health, then and only then, could they 


and their families and their gods be well supplied with everything. They depended upon the blessings of 
their gods and their gods depended upon the offerings and prayers of their people. As long as they served 
their gods by working in the fields, fishing in the rivers, hunting in the outback and offering a portion 
of their work to their gods through the priests of the temples, the Sumerians experienced the fullness of 
life. Sumeria was a happy land. And the Sumerians were, in general, a happy people. And why not? They 
had in abundance everything that Life has to offer. They were blessed by the gods and they knew it - and 
other people knew it, too. Other people who lived in the rocky terrain or in the desert wastes knew how 
fertile and bountiful was Sumeria. And they coveted that food-filled land. 

Because of the discoveries of modern archeology, we can throw aside the Jewish lies that the 
ancient people were evil sinners just because they didn't pray to a Jewish god who hated them. All of the 
slanders that the rabbis wrote about them in the Old Testament are proven false by the cuneiform texts 
that the Mesopotamians have left us as records of their histories and their very thoughts. If they made an 
idol of their sun god in a temple, it was no more or less of an idol than the idol that the Jews make of their 
Torah scroll which they adore and kiss and march around all dressed up in tapestries with a crown on its 

The lies that the Jews told about these religious people are easily proved to be lies by the prayers of 
the Mesopotamian Peoples, themselves. This prayer to the sun god is just as valid as any prayer offered up 
by Christians or Muslims today: 

"O Shamash, . . . judge of heaven and earth.... 

who establishes light for the people; 

Shamash, when you set, light is withdrawn from the people .... 

When you come forth, all mankind becomes warm. 

The cattle and living things that go out on the steppe land, 

they come towards you, you give them life. 

You judge the case of the wronged man and wronged woman; 

you give them a just decision." [ 21 ] 

". . .You take care of all the people of the lands; 

Everything that Ea, the king, the counselor, 

has brought into being is wholly entrusted to you. 

Whatever has breath, you shepherd equally; 

You are their keeper, above and below. . . . 

You give the crooked judge experience of prison; 

The person who perverts justice for a bribe, you make to bear punishment. 

He who does not accept a bribe but takes the part of the weak 

Is pleasing to Shamash, who will give him long life." [ 22 ] 

Such prayers tell us of the devotion and love these People had in their hearts. But they also tell 
us something about certain criminals who ravaged their societies. The "crooked judge", the lawyer who 
"perverts justice for a bribe", were very much a part of Sumerian society because they "have always been 
here". And because they "have always been here," we in modern times must learn from history and root 
them out entirely. Such prayers as these identify crooks in high places. At the same time, their prayers 
prove the ethical foundation of the priests and temples. There were no lying rabbis telling them to choose 
neither good nor evil but to choose the self-serving desires of their atheist lusts. The Sumerian priests 
could see very clearly the good and evil in men and preached against those who took advantage of the 
poor and the weak. The temples were places of solace and refuge. 

However, one must not assume that the ancient Sumerians had the idea that their god would 


save them in a heavenly paradise after death in exchange for the service and devotion of the suppliant. 
Such ideas would have to await the Aryan Hindu and Aryan Buddha and the Celtic-Druidic ideas and 
the teachings of Jesus several thousand years later. For the Mesopotamian, who saw the purpose of life 
to be only as a servant of the gods, what After-Life there was for him, was nothing but the gloom of the 

And so, they made the most of every single day both with joyful appreciation and with deep 
prayer. They did not view their gods as being particularly bounded to moral justice because gods could 
do what they wanted. As a servant of the gods, mortal Man was of no significance. And so, personal 
ambition and personal greed were accepted as legitimate character traits. But these traits were to be 
tempered with morality and goodness and honesty because this was how the gods wanted their people to 
be, followers of justice, of the "straight way". 

Always among all of the ancient peoples, there were priests. Perhaps they did not start their 
careers as priests, but they became priests, nevertheless. Sitting around a fire at night, contemplating the 
stars or perhaps offering wise counsel to their fellows, certain people become respected through their 
wisdom and advice. Or perhaps looking into the the future and wondering about the coming season's 
prosperity, and calculating the moon phases and star crossings, gave them a certain skill for helping their 
people prepare for the proper times for sowing and planting. 

Some people became priests merely because they could see the futility of pursuing any other 
occupation since wealth and power are temporary while infinite time and space are immortal. And 
against infinite time and the temporary nature of Life, what other help does Mankind have other than 
that from the gods? And what better way to understand Eternity and to help the People than to be a 
priest? Modern scientists may scoff as they are being shoveled into their graves, but the ancient people 
discovered something amazing about a life devoted to realization of godhead. The discoverers of these 
mysteries were the priests who maintained the temples of the gods. And the beneficiaries of these 
mysteries were the People, themselves, who devoted their love and their lives to the gods. 

Beneath the starry skies, beneath the brilliant sun, upon the wide and beautiful Earth, the 
ancient Sumerians asked the question: "What is the purpose of Life?" And they realized the answer: "The 
purpose of Life, is to serve God." And when they worked together toward that purpose, Life became 
abundant and joyful to them. It was truly a wonderful mystery that such was so. 

One of the great discoveries of the Sumerians was that every man and woman could attain an 
actual realization of God. Certainly, they prayed and made sacrifice to their deities, but they also received 
solace in return. Like any modern religious person (whether Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Taoist or 
Muslim) who feels good and holy through their daily genuflexions and prayers, so too did the Sumerians 
feel the bliss and confidence that comes to those who fulfill their duties in the service of God. No atheist 
or agnostic can understand the peaceful bliss that is experienced when certainty of God enters a person's 

Ancient Mesopotamians believed that man was created to serve the gods. This principle was 
interpreted literally, so the idols of the gods were cared for, fed, and clothed. They expressed their 
adoration of the god by serving the image of the god. The temple administration included the chief priest, 
various kinds of exorcists, singers, musicians, scribes, and the staff who supervised the temple businesses. 

According to a detailed text from the much later Seleucid period, although certainly valid also for 
Sumerian times, the divine statues in the temple of Uruk were served two meals daily. The first meal was 
served in the morning when the temple opened, and the other was served at night, immediately before 
the doors of the sanctuary were closed. Each meal included two courses, called "main" and "second." 
From descriptions of divine meals, the following sequence can be reconstructed. First, a table was placed 
before the image. Water for washing was offered in a bowl (even the gods had to wash up before eating!). 
Then a variety of beverages, special cuts of meat, and fruits were brought to the table. When the gods 


ate, they were hidden from both priests and the common people. [ 23 ] Whatever was left over, in no way 
different from the hypocritical Jewish rabbis, the priests and their families would eat. 

The modern day atheists may scoff but they do not understand that this religious ritual was not 
simply a means of providing a physical service to an imaginary god. Rather, the physical service was 
provided as a means of devotion to a spiritual god. Just as Man is a physical being who houses a holy 
spirit within him, he uses a physical representation of his god to serve as a house and a resting place for 
his god. Thus, the statues and images of the various ancient peoples were never believed to be the actual 
god, himself. These images were physical places into which the gods were believed to enter. So, an ancient 
person would look at the image of a god and know that that god was inside of that image looking out 
at him. To the ancient people, the gods were real. To modern people, the gods are imaginary. But since 
modern people cannot even see something as simple and common place as their own divine and holy 
spirits - their own chi - how can they expect to understand God? Modern people have been led astray. 
By whom? You shall learn. 

But whether or not you believe that a god actually lived inside of the statues, doesn't matter 
anymore than whether you believe that God created the world in six days. If you want to understand the 
ancient people, what you believe doesn't matter. What the ancient people believed , is all that matters. And 
it is their beliefs that shaped their history and their culture, not your beliefs. 

No less than modern Man, they asked themselves the Grand Questions of Life. The results of their 
philosophical ponderings were written in cuneiform classics such as the Epic of Gilgamesh. The Epic 
of Gilgamesh was first written onto clay tablets at the turn of the Second Millennium or earlier (around 
2,000 BC) . It was popular among the Sumerians, as well as later among the Babylonians, Assyrians, 
Hittites, and Hurrians who no doubt read it to the illiterate and numerous other peoples of the Near East. 
The Epic itself is, of course, much older. 

For generations, the folk memory of the Sumerian people passed along poems and stories by 
word of mouth. Only after many generations were such stories preserved by poets in written form. These 
poems contained great wisdom. The great problems of Mankind were cited and pondered and wise 
conclusions were attained for the mysteries of Life, Death and the Here-after. 

That The Epic of Gilgamesh was a popular poem, is attested by the numerous fragments of copies 
scattered all over the Fertile Crescent region and beyond. Thus, this ancient refrain from The Epic of 
Gilgamesh is often repeated in the literature of all peoples: 

"Gilgamesh opened his mouth, 

Saying to Enkidu: 

"Who, my friend, can scale heaven? 

Only the gods live forever under the sun. 

As for Mankind, numbered are their days. 

Whatever they achieve is but the wind." 

Do these words sound familiar to those of you who have read the Bible or the Qur'an or the 
Bhagavad-gita? These are the observations of the wise men of all peoples. These longings, these hopes 
that Life is not a passing phase never to return but is merely one step in an eternal procession, were 
thoughts written down by many peoples who were far older than the lying, perfidious Jews. 

"Shamash was distraught, as he betook himself to him; 

He says to Gilgamesh: 

"Gilgamesh, whither rovest thou? 

The life thou pursuest thou shall not find." 


Gilgamesh says to him, to valiant Shamash; 

"After marching and rowing over the steppe, 

Must I lay my head in the heart of the earth 

That I may sleep through all the years? 

Let mine eyes behold the sun 

That I may have my fill of the light! 

Darkness withdraws when there is enough light. 

May one who indeed is dead behold yet the radiance of the sun!" [ 24 ] 

Do these themes not sound familiar to you readers of the Old Testament? The writer of 
Ecclesiastes was familiar with the Epic of Gilgamesh as is reflected numerous times in Ecclesiastes 2:24 
and in 5:18, 8:15 and 9:8-10. And the Epic continues: 

"Siduri the tavern-keeper said to Gilgamesh: 

Gilgamesh, whither rovest thou? 

The life thou pursuest, thou shalt not find. 

When the gods created Mankind, 

Death for Mankind they set aside, 

Life in their own hands retaining. 

Thou, Gilgamesh, let full be thy belly, 

Make thou merry by day and by night. 

Of each day make thou a feast of rejoicing, 

Day and night dance thou and play! 

Let thy garments be sparkling fresh, 

Thy head be washed, bathe thou in water. 

Pay heed to the little one that holds on to thy hand, 

Let thy spouse delight in thy bosom! 

For this is the task of Mankind." [ 25 ] 

And as in Ecclesiastes 2:16 and 9:5, so too in Gilgamesh: 

"Since the days of yore there has been no permanence; 
The resting and the dead, how alike they are! 
Do they not compose a picture of death, 
The commoner and the noble, 
Once they are near to their fate?" [ 26 ] 

As expressions of their sincere devotion and piety, the Sumerians built great temples to their gods 
in all of their cities. These rectangular temples were constructed of mud bricks and decorated with gold 
and silver and precious stones. They built high ziggurat towers of three levels with the god's house at the 
top and all of it enclosed by the walls of the temple grounds. 

That the temples were the largest and tallest buildings in a Mesopotamian city very significantly 
indicates that the most important and most powerful persons in those ancient societies were the priests 
who served their gods of Creation and their gods of the Universe. This is an identical correlation in the 
modern, Western societies of the 20th and 21st centuries AD. However, in all of the modern cities today, 
the biggest and tallest buildings in a city are not the temples or churches. The biggest and tallest buildings 
are owned by the bankers and moneylenders. The banks are presided over by the mighty dwarfs of 


finance who serve their gods of money. Those who bow to the gods, are servants of the gods; those who 
bow to money, are betrayers of the gods. The ancient people followed the example of their priests while 
modern people follow the example of their greedy bankers. As you shall see, whether your Life leads 
through heaven or hell depends upon whom you follow as your leader. 

Because the Sumerians devoted their lives to serving the gods, the temples were more than mere 
places of worship. Since the purpose of Life was to serve the gods, every aspect of Life was an act of 
service and devotion to god. So, the temples were also centers of manufacture and trade. As the "estates" 
of the gods, the temple grounds were where the business of a vibrant society was transacted. Temples 
were places of worship as well as places for doing business and conducting trade. 

The temples managed the cultivation of grain and vegetables and fruit trees. The temple 
shepherds took care of the herds of sheep, goats and cattle. Inside of the temple grounds and in outlying 
cottages, the temple staff supervised a spinning and weaving industry. Cloth, clothing, leather, wooden 
and pottery objects were all manufactured for use by the temples both on the temple grounds and in 
outlying properties. These goods were used for domestic and foreign trade. And for all of these activities, 
storerooms, granaries, workshops and living quarters were required. [ 27 ] 

Because of their profits from manufacturing and trade as well as being the beneficiaries of the 
goods and properties bequeathed to them from pious devotees, the temples grew in wealth and in landed 
property. They were not only the center for the lives of the Sumerian peoples but were their nurturing 
and protecting element as well. In times of famine, the temples gave interest-free loans of grain to the 
people. The temples provided a refuge for orphans and illegitimate children. Parents who were being 
hounded by the moneylenders, could sell their beloved children to the temple for service to God rather 
than sell them to the moneylenders as lifelong slaves and prostitutes. 

In addition to the main temple in the city, every town and village had its own small sanctuaries; 
every house had its own little alcove that housed a statue or a talisman of the family god. Along the roads, 
the canals and the thoroughfares, were wayside shrines where a farmer or boatman could pause for a 
quick blessing from the god and where merchants and travelers could ask for divine protection or to offer 
thanks for a safe return. Without doubt and with all certainty, the people of Mesopotamia were a religious 
people. They were not the knaves that the lying Jews and ignorant Christians and maniac Muslims claim 
that they were. They were a religious people who honored the gods and who lived their lives as nobly as 
they could. 

To understand the power and wealth that the Sumerian people enjoyed, you cannot use money 
as a measure of wealth. Money, as you will see, is mainly (though not entirely) a fraudulent delusion. It 
is better to understand the goods that money can buy since these goods are no different today than they 
were five thousand years ago. A cow is a cow no matter if you can buy one for a penny or for a thousand 
dollars. And even though a tiny dab of silver no larger than a barleycorn means no more to a modern 
person than a handful of paper money would have meant to a Sumerian, a cow is still a cow today just as 
it was in ancient times. The cow is no different, only the money that it takes to buy the cow is different. 

If a Mesopotamian worker of 3000 BC could fill his stomach for a penny's worth of barley 
porridge bought from a roadside shop while a modern office worker pays ten dollars for the same-sized 
bowl of porridge bought from a fancy restaurant, both the ancient man and the modern man are filled up 
on a bowl of porridge and are satisfied. The bowl of porridge is no different, only the amount of money 
to purchase them is different. How can anyone say that a copper penny is less valuable than a paper ten- 
dollar bill if they both can only buy the same bowl of porridge? Physical things are constant while money 
is as variable as a mirage. Be careful, the Sumerian Swindle is at work here. I will repeat these arguments 
later, but it will be useful to you to begin thinking about these concepts now. Modern people are being 
swindled out of their physical goods in exchange for a mirage. 

To get an idea of the scale of wealth that flowed through Mesopotamia in 3000 BC, let's look at 


just the food that was required by a Sumerian temple in just one day. Enormous amounts of food were 
provided to temple administrators and craftsmen. For example, one text listed a daily total of more than 
500 kilograms of bread, forty sheep, two bulls, one bullock, eight lambs, seventy birds and ducks, four 
wild boars, three ostrich eggs, dates, figs, raisins, and fifty- four containers of beer and wine, in addition to 
other offerings. 

The best agricultural products and the best food animals were sent to the temple, to be used in 
three different ways: as daily food served to the divine image, as income or rations for the temple staff 
who supervised and prepared the divine meals, and as savings accumulated for future use or for trade. 
The temple also relied on funds supplied by the royal house, by wealthy citizens, and, occasionally, from 
shares of war booty. The temple represented the communal identity of each city. The temple was usually 
located in the center of the city and was both the largest and tallest building in the city. [ 28 ] 

Until recently it was generally believed that in the early Sumerian period the temple owned all 
the land of the city-state, but it has now been shown that the temple share amounted to perhaps no more 
than one-eighth of the whole. The rest of the land was owned by families or clans collectively, and could 
only be sold by agreement of all the prominent members of the family or clan. The buyers of such land 
would be members of what was becoming the ruling class or nobility, and these people thereby came to 
own land as private property in addition to what they held as family property. Their lands were worked 
by poor landless freemen. [ 29 ] 

In a normal society, there are four general classes or castes. This social pyramid is formed by the 
priests at the top who guide society. They are followed by the king and administrators who serve and 
protect society. These are served by the merchants and traders while all of society is supported by the 
farmers and laborers. These four classes make up society - that is, these four classes make up all normally 
evolving societies. Originally, this, too, was the normal and natural arrangement in Mesopotamian 
society in its earliest stages. The natural order was clearly observable within the earliest archeological 
record but was later sublimated behind a super-imposed "wealth factor". 

At a very early stage, this "wealth factor" began to corrupt the natural order of Society. As money 
flowed into their coffers through the Sumerian Swindle and as their wealth increased, this normally 
evolving human society of priest-king-merchant-and-farmer, devolved instead to the beginnings of what 
we have today in modern society. 

The corrupted system of society that we have today is composed of moneylender-merchant - 
president-and-slave. This corruption was not apparent to the Sumerians any more than it has been 
apparent to the modern archeologists because it evolved so slowly and insidiously that the Sumerians 
didn't notice the subtle changes. It has been overlooked by the modern archeologists simply because "it 
has always been here." And so, modern society also suffers under the perverse criminals who operate the 
Sumerian Swindle today - the bankers, the merchants and the financial speculators, most of whom are 

Sumeria's entire social structure became based on ownership. Sumerian society was divided into 
two groups, those who owned property, especially land, and those who were dependent upon the wealthy 
- the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots]." [ 30 ] Thus, from a very early time in the earliest 
history of civilization a perversion occurred in the Natural Order of Mankind and this perversion was 
carried along through successive eras as an accepted practice simply because "it has always been here". 

While the ancient people were serving their gods in the temples, and while the priests and kings 
were serving their gods and nurturing their people throughout the country, and while society was 
evolving normally and joyfully, in the dark and dismal mud-brick houses of the moneylenders, the great 
evil of the Sumerian Swindle arose, secretly, with only the moneylenders profiting from the destruction of 
the People. 


Ancient Egypt 

We will study more about ancient Egypt in later chapters. But to focus on the theme of this book, 
a short mention is here in order. 

Many modern people assume that Egypt is older than Mesopotamia. This is due to the fact that 
the ancient Egyptians built with enduring stone while the Sumerians and Babylonians built with mud 
bricks. So, Egyptian tombs and monuments are still present today while the mud-brick temples and 
palaces of ancient Sumeria, Babylonia and Assyria are little more than mounds of dirt. Also, the high 
water table in Sumeria destroyed all organic evidence while the drier conditions of Egypt preserved even 
hair, bone and linens. 

The Egyptian civilization was old but not as old as Sumeria. As the Ice Age declined and the earth 
warmed from its long winter, the vast grasslands of the Saharan Plain - which had been a rich hunting 
ground that was filled with zebras, giraffes and antilope - dried up and turned into desert. The dark- 
skinned peoples who had hunted these grasslands moved on to more hospitable environs toward central 
Africa while the light skinned people who had colonized the Mediterranean Basin and North Africa 
moved to the fringes of the Mediterranean Sea and to the Nile valley. By 2700 BC - three centuries after 
Sumerian culture had blossomed - the Old Kingdom period of Egypt began. As isolated as Egypt was, 
surrounded by inhospitable deserts, three hundred years is plenty of time for such inventions as writing 
and agriculture to spread to Egypt from Sumeria. The ideas spread but not the culture that fostered them. 
So, Egypt evolved its own unique culture though some of the ideas that it borrowed from Sumeria were 
ideas that grew into uniquely Egyptian expressions of them. 

There are three important differences between Sumeria and Egypt that should be noted. First, 
while the Sumerians believed that the king was the servant of the gods, the Egyptians believed that the 
king was, himself, a god incarnate. The Sumerians lived to serve the gods while the Egyptians lived to 
serve the Pharaoh. By serving the Pharaoh-god-incarnate, they served the gods. Second, in Sumeria, 
the lands originally belonged to the temple to be worked in service to the gods. In Egypt, the lands and 
all of Egypt belonged to Pharaoh. And third, the Egyptians never made use of a money system - at least 
it wasn't a money system that could be manipulated by greedy merchants. All business and services in 
Egypt were accomplished through barter and food rations. Workers were paid in rations of grain and oil 
and cloth. The only markers that could be used as a sort of money were scarabs. And since these carved 
dung beetles were not made of precious metals, they couldn't be falsified by weight or mixed with base 
metals. They were simply tally scarabs allowing their exchange for a ration payment. Thus, they had local 
but not international value. 

Money tends to free people to more easily trade the necessities of life among themselves. Barter 
tends to restrict people to a lifestyle that cannot be easily divorced from the land. For example, a rich 
farmer in Sumeria, after selling his grain for silver, could hide his silver under a rock. Thus, a huge pile of 
grain could be concealed by being turned into silver and then hidden. But a successful farmer in Egypt, 
after growing the same amount of grain as the Sumerian, needed to store his grain in a large storehouse 
where his wealth was easily observed by anyone. Barter tended to keep people tied to their land and to 
their crafts since whatever they did for a living could only be turned into proft by trading for an equally 
bulky and heavy pile of trade goods. This tended to add to the Egyptians' isolation as a people because 
what limited travel there was in those early days was not easily accomplished by people whose wealth was 
stored as bulky and heavy sacks of grain rather than relatively light and concealable purses of silver. 

Also, with barter, much more wealth can be concentrated at the top of the social pyramid when 
a laborer's pay is in food rather than silver. A hungry worker is glad to have a handful of food as his 
pay and is less likely to run away when his food is limited by how much grain he can carry. And when 
everyone gets the same ration of food or clothing, there is not much incentive for individual achievement. 


And so, Egypt attained a high level of culture and a unique civilization but its achievements leveled off 
after the first thousand years because by then they had developed everything that they needed. 

Because of the relative security offered by its surrounding deserts, Egypt was able to enjoy a more 
peaceful cultural evolution than the constantly warring Mesopotamia. Sumeria was surrounded by a 
variety of different peoples and had no natural barriers against attack. So, Sumeria underwent far greater 
social changes over time than did Egypt. Culture always progresses during times of peace so the several 
thousand years of peace that Egypt enjoyed found expression in everything from the pyramides and 
temples to the daily life of a happy and contented people. Thus, the religious and spiritual knowledge that 
most ancient people experience was fostered in the peaceful lands of ancient Egypt. There, great religious 
mysteries were attained that were not equaled until the arrival of the Buddha and the Christ. 

Modern science has no knowledge or concept of what the ancient Egyptians had achieved 
on the religious and spiritual level. Knowledge of auras, the spiritual body, the dynamics of the bio- 
electric energy field (chi), super-human strength, out-of-body travel, meditational transcendence, and 
communion with God, were all common knowledge to the Egyptian priests and people though such 
knowledge is still a mystery to the hunch-backed and diseased modern scientists. These subjects are dealt 
with more thoroughly in How the Jews Betrayed Mankind, Volume II, "The Monsters of Babylon". 

Although Egypt was growing to the greatness for which it is justifiably famous, it was an isolated 
kingdom that had very little effect upon the early history of Mesopotamia. That being said, let's return to 
the history of Sumeria. 


Chapter 5 
Life in Sumeria: the Haves and Have-Nots 

The quality of life in any country can be best understood by whether or not the People have 
for themselves the Eight Essentials of Life. This is an ancient knowledge but one that you can use to 
question the quality of your own life and the success of your own race and your own country. These Eight 
Essentials of Life may seem like a simplistic way of looking at civilization and at happiness, but why make 
things complicated when happiness is so easy to understand? 

The Eight Essentials of Life are: Air, Water, Food, Clothing, Shelter, Spouse, Children and God. 
When people have all of these, then life is good and the people are happy. You can measure the quality 
of your own life by considering these Eight Essentials and whether on not you have them, yourself. But 
for now, let's just see how these affected the people of Sumeria and the other peoples of the Ancient Near 

There was not much problem with the Sumerians having enough good air to breathe. Not having 
air pollution to contend with as we do in modern times, they had plenty of fresh air everyday unless of 
course a dust storm blew in from the desert. So, both the "Haves" and the "Have-Nots" were equal in 
this regard. Although not everyone knew the priestly and religious secrets of meditational breathing, 
everyone at least had fresh and unpolluted air to breath. 

Also, water was not much of a problem. Although they lived in the semi-arid and desert 
conditions of the Fertile Crescent, the water of the Euphrates and Tigress rivers and their tributaries 
provided plenty of water. And the water table was high enough for wells to be dug. However, not knowing 
of water-bourn diseases or of bacteria, all levels of society suffered from such things as dysentery and a 
variety of infections and lung ailments. After all, these were farming communities always in close contact 
with dirty animals and the bacteria and toxic mold spores from dung piles. And their houses were made 
of mud -bricks, so filthy conditions where a small scratch could lead to severe infections were a constant 
part of life. The average life span was just forty years. 

Food is the third Essential of Life. However, this is where the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum 
[Have-Nots] began to experience different qualities of life. As most people will agree, food is not just a 
necessity but it is also one of the pleasures of life since the delicious flavors that can be derived from good 
cooking are so nice. Much can be deduced about any people by studying the food that they ate. 

In Mesopotamia, with its hot sun and fertile soil, two crops per year of a large variety of foods 
were grown. Compare what you find at your local supermarket with the foods enjoyed by these ancient 
people and you will see that they had just as great a variety. 

The basic food of all Sumerians was, of course, grain. Barley was the chief grain of Sumeria 
primarily because it could grow in a more alkaline soil than could wheat. Wheat was grown in the higher 
elevations, but for the irrigated lands of Mesopotamia where the evaporating and percolating irrigation 
water raised the salt content of the soil, barley was the staple crop. Other cereals eaten, besides barley 
and wheat, were millet and rye. These were eaten either as unleavened breads that were either baked or 
roasted as thin disks upon a hot griddle (as is still done in the Middle East today) or cooked into thick 
porridges. Rice was not cultivated until the first millennium BC. 

Onions, leeks, shallots and garlic were basic to the ancient diet. Their savory flavors and healthful 
qualities were as much appreciated then as they are today. Onions were described in the cuneiform texts 
as being sharp, sweet, or those "which have a strong odor." 

In their extensive gardens, the farmers also grew lettuce and endive, melons and gourds, lentils, 


beets, carrot-like plants and fennel bulbs. Lentils, beans and chickpeas were plentiful and when eaten 
with the various grains, provided a balanced and wholesome diet. Other vegetables included a variety of 
lettuces, cabbage, summer and winter cucumbers (described as either sweet or bitter), radishes, beets, 
and a kind of turnip. Fresh vegetables were eaten raw or boiled in water. 

Many herbs and spices were available, such as salt, coriander, black and white cumin, mustard, 
fennel, marjoram, thyme, basil, mint, rosemary, fenugreek, watercress, saffron and rue (an acrid, green 
leafy plant). Dates were an important part of the common diet, while the palm also provided date sugar 
and date wine, as well as a celery- like delicacy cut from the growing heart of the male palm. They made 
sweet date syrup from the dates. And of course, because they were easily dried and preserved, dates were 
a valuable trade commodity with foreign lands. 

The Sumerians did not use sugar; instead, they substituted fruit juices, particularly grape and 
date juice. And so, their teeth were not rotten like the teeth of modern people who suffer from the Jewish 
Medical Swindles as described in Volume III, The Blood-Suckers of Judah. 

Only the very rich could afford honey, which may have been imported. "Mountain honey" as well 
as "dark," "red," and "white" honey were mentioned in cuneiform texts. Other fruits commonly grown 
were apples, pears, grapes, figs, quince, plums, apricots, cherries, mulberries, melons, medlar, peach, 
pomegranates, as well as pistachios. 

Meat was also a part of the ancient Mesopotamian diet. Massive reed barns housed numerous 
flocks and herds, which were then redistributed for sustenance and cultic needs. The animals were 
delivered alive and then slaughtered by a butcher. But some animals were dead on arrival. Both types 
of meat were considered fit for human consumption. The meat from already dead animals was fed to 
soldiers, messengers, and cult personnel. Dead asses were used only as dog meat. 

Poultry, geese, and ducks were raised for meat and eggs; the hen was introduced from India in 
the first millennium BC along with rice culture. Mutton, and less commonly beef, were eaten at festivals, 
and in the earliest times offerings of goats were a regular feature of peasant worship and presumably 
an equally regular part of peasant diet. But as the moneylenders increased their wealth, there was a 
corresponding reduction in the wealth of the people, so the ordinary peasant could less afford goat meat 
in his diet because his pay for his labor was reduced so much. 

Pig meat was regularly eaten since wild pigs were found in the southern marshes and domestic 
pigs were raised in large herds. As scavengers, they could eat anything and barley was provided them as 
a supplement. Since fat is usually in short supply in primitive diets, fat pork was considered a delicacy. A 
Sumerian proverb makes the point that it was too good for slave girls, who had to make do with the lean 

Because of the shortage of suitable pastureland, cattle were relatively few in number. Horse-flesh 
was eaten by humans without involving any religious taboo, at least in the Nuzi area east of Assyria in the 
fourteenth century BC, and a lawsuit is recorded in which the defendants had stolen and eaten a horse. 

The Sumerians also drank milk: cow's milk, goat's milk, and ewe's milk. Milk soured quickly in 
the hot climate of southern Iraq. Ghee (clarified butter) was less perishable than milk, as was the round, 
chalky cheese, which could be transformed back to sour milk by grating it and adding water. The texts 
do not mention the processing of sheep's milk before the Persian period, at which time it was made into 
a kind of cottage cheese. Other dairy products included yogurt and butter. Many kinds of cheeses were 
produced: a white cheese (for the king's table), "fresh" cheese, and flavored, sweetened, and sharp cheeses. 

The rivers were filled with fish, turtles, and eggs. A Sumerian text (~ 2000 BC) described the 
habits and appearance of eighteen species offish including carp, sturgeon, catfish and eels. Fish was an 
important source of protein in the diet. 

In addition to beer and date wine, wine from the grape was known as early as the Proto-literate 
period (3200-2900 BC), probably as an import from the highlands; it was not in that early period a drink 


in everyday use. Such fermented beverages, which probably contained a good deal of lees, were in the 
Sumerian period imbibed from a common vat through hollow reeds, of which the end was perforated 
with small holes to form a kind of filter. 

Beer was an important part of the Sumerian diet and there were many varieties. The literal 
translation was "barley beer." The Sumerians at Ur enjoyed dark beer, clear beer, freshly brewed beer, and 
well-aged beer as well as sweet and bitter beers. They did not use hops for flavoring. Ration lists for palace 
employees recorded the distribution of one quart to one gallon of beer a day, depending on the rank of 
the recipient. 

Throughout Mesopotamian history, brewing was in the hands of women, for this craft is the only 
one which was under the protection of female divinities, while the ale-wife is specifically mentioned in 
the laws of Hammurabi. 

Unlike beer, wine could be made only once a year, when the grapes ripened, but wine had a longer 
shelf life when stored in a sealed jar. It was referred to as a very expensive and rare commodity, found in 
areas of natural rainfall in the highlands. Many wines were named after their places of origin. Though 
wine consumption increased over time, it was still a luxury item, served only to the gods and to the 
wealthy. Only women ran the wine shops where certain priestesses were prohibited from entering upon 
penalty of death. Other products of the vine included grape juice, wine vinegar, and raisins. 

As you can see, with all of this great variety of foods, the Mesopotamian peoples had everything 
that they needed to cook some delicious and healthful foods. Cereals were made into pastry, cakes or 
biscuits by cooking the flour mixed with honey, ghee, sesame oil, milk or various fruits. 

Soups were prepared with a starch or flour base of chickpeas, lentils, barley flour, emmer flour, 
onions, lentils, beans, mutton fat or oil, honey, or meat juice. The soups were thick and nourishing - a 
meal in a bowl. 

Many foods were preserved for times of need. Grains were easy to keep and when properly stored 
could last for decades. Legumes could be dried in the sun. A variety of fruits were pressed into cakes. 
Fish and meat were preserved by salting, drying, and smoking. During the winter, ice was brought from 
the highlands, covered with straw and stored in icehouses for cooling beverages even during the hottest 

Thus, it can be seen that the Sumerians and the people of Mesopotamia were well stocked with 
food. Indeed, the bountiful harvests of the Fertile Crescent region are what supported these people in 
attaining the higher levels of civilization. With abundant food from an agricultural base, they were not 
restricted in their cultural advancement like their nomadic neighbors who relied upon the unreliable 
hunting and gathering and the nomadic shepherding of goats. 

The Sumerians ate two meals a day. They bragged about their highly developed cuisine and 
compared it to that of the desert nomads, whom they believed had no idea of the ways of civilized life. 
They described the nomads as eating raw food and not even knowing how to make a cake with flour, 
eggs, and honey. [ 31 ] [ 32 ] Such an abundance and variety of food caused the hungry goat-herders of the 
surrounding countries to covet those fruitful lands of Mesopotamia. 

With food, the Third Essential of Life, well supplied, what did the Sumerians do for clothing? 
Spinning and weaving was an art known since Paleolithic times. Because the Sumerians kept sheep and 
goats, the wool clothing that they made kept them warm in the winter. And they grew flax that produced 
a light cloth for summer months. But since the generally hot weather required few clothes at all, Clothing, 
the Fourth Essential of Life, was also well supplied to these people. 

The Fifth Essential of Life is shelter. Again, this was easily supplied by the natural surroundings. 
The people who lived in the marshes of Sumer, had learned how to build rather large and beautiful 
houses out of the giant reeds that grew there in abundance. These were used both for housing and for 
barns for their small cattle and as pens for ducks and geese. Such reed houses are still used today in 


southern Iraq by the so-called "marsh Arabs". [ Figure 5 1 

And of course, Mesopotamia is famous for its large cities made entirely of mud bricks. As any 
child knows, mud can be made into many things besides mud pies. And when it dries, it is almost "as 
hard as a rock". From mud bricks, huge temples were built reaching eighty feet above the plains. Entire 
cities with double-storied houses, domed roofs and arches, sewer drainage systems and town walls were 
made entirely from mud bricks, both sun-dried for common work and baked bricks for fortifications, 
drain pipes and palace facades. 

With food and shelter well- supplied, the Sumerians found that the Sixth Essential of Life, 
a spouse, was not difficult to find or to care for. Marriage (throughout the whole of Sumerian and 
Babylonian society) was monogamous in the sense that a man might have only one woman who ranked 
as a wife and who enjoyed a social status corresponding to his. But for a man to also go the Temple to 
enjoy "praying" with the temple prostitutes, was not something for an obedient wife to complain about. 
And once the moneylenders had perverted society enough by turning the wives and children of their 
"clients" into whores and slaves, it became a normal part of Mesopotamian society to make use of the 
female slaves as sex slaves. The offspring of such unions were carefully legislated in the surviving law 
codes. There were few, if any, bachelors in Mesopotamia. [ 33 ] As you shall see, slavery grew because of 
the growing national and private debts of the people to the moneylenders. As slavery increased, sexual 
exploitation became an ever- increasing pleasure of the moneylenders and merchants who owned them. 

The Seventh Essential of Life are children. Most civilizations know children provide help for the 
parents in old age and are thus a savings account toward the later years. With children, society is assured 
a strong and bright future. And with children, parents can experience the fulfillment and the immortal 
nature of their lives and they can assure themselves of comfort in their old age. Although most people in 
those days did not live into old age, at least with children, they could more easily make a living because 
children became workers in the fields and shops very early. The moneylenders made good use of children 
because they could hire a man and his boys to work the fields and pay only for the man. 

However, even though civilization was successful in Mesopotamia, and even though the country 
had attained a population of one million by the third millennium BC, life expectancy was still rather 
short. The average life expectancy was about 40 years although many lived to be older. Fifty, sixty or 
ninety years were not unknown. In a wisdom text from the Syrian city of Emar, the gods allotted Man a 
maximum lifetime of 120 years. To see one's family in the fourth generation was considered the ultimate 
blessing of extreme old age. We know that the mother of King Nabonidus lived for 104 years - she told 
us so in her autobiography. Archives have shown that some individuals lived at least seventy years. But as 
the moneylenders manipulated the kings and their countries into wars, not old age but battle casualties 
became the major cause of death among adult males. [ 34 ] 

Finally, with the Eighth Essential of Life, their God to protect and nurture them, the Sumerians 
had everything that life could offer. The fertile land produced abundant crops and there was enough 
food for everybody as well as a huge excess for trade. With their flocks of sheep and goats and fields of 
flax, there was enough wool and linen clothes to protect them from both heat and cold. The mud and the 
reeds gave them shelter. The work in the fields gave them food. Yes, there was enough for everybody. 

That is, there was enough for everybody except for the moneylenders of the Treasonous Class 
who already had more than they could ever use. For those greedy and voracious parasites, nothing could 
satisfy them because there was an entire world that they did not own, yet. And so, even though there 
was enough of everything for everybody, the food and the goods were not everywhere equally abundant 
because there were only two social classes that had evolved in this Cradle of Civilization, this Fertile 
Crescent, this land of Sumeria and Babylonia and Assyria, this land of Mesopotamia. 

There was enough for everybody but not everybody had enough. This was because the two classes 
of the awilum [the Haves] and the muskenum [the Have-Nots] were all that were allowed to exist since 


the "Haves" got what they had by taking it either by force or by fraud from the "Have-Nots." Under a 
system where the Sumerian Swindle was allowed to exist, there could only be Haves and Have-Nots and 
Slaves because the fraudulent nature of lending-at-interest mathematically and automatically swindled all 
wealth into the hands of the awilum [the Haves]. 

Under the relentless arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle, the Treasonous Class was determined 
that for them to continue to be the "Haves" then that meant that everyone else would have to continue to 
be the "Have-Nots". The awilum [Haves] got everything that they had from the muskenum [Have-Nots]. 
And to keep what they got meant that they could not give any of it back. The muskenum [Have-Nots] 
accepted this state of affairs because they did not understand the Sumerian Swindle for what it was. They 
believed that owing more than you borrow was "a normal part of life" simply because the Sumerian 
Swindle "had always been here." 

Defrauding the Peasants 

As population and land use increased, it was necessary for the various farms and gardens on 
arable land to be carefully plotted, measured and the boundaries marked. Of course, the scribes were the 
only ones who knew how to calculate land sizes and to make measurements. They could also read and 
write the sales contracts, mortgages, rentals, leases and work agreements on the clay tablets for all to see. 
A good memory was not enough once writing became the basis of contracts and agreements. If a peasant 
could not read, then he was dependant upon the scribes. However, trickery and deceit was a valued talent 
in Mesopotamia. Those with the money, education and avarice tended to oppress and dispossess those 
without these attributes. No matter how blatant the fraud, the poor had little defense from the ravages 
of the rich, just as in modern times. Their only protectors were the priests who preached mercy for the 
muskenum [Have-Nots] and who disapproved of the evils practiced by the awilum [Haves] . 

Even though there was plenty of land available for crops, this land could not produce a harvest 
without huge expenditures of labor. Canals and irrigation ditches needed to be dug, the soil needed to 
be plowed, furrowed, harrowed, raked, watered, weeded and tended, all meticulously with hand tools 
and an ox-drawn plow. Birds needed to be frightened away. The investment in labor by the farmers was 
immense. The house that they built out of mud bricks, was both back-breaking labor and a labor of love 
by men who enjoy working on their own land with their own hands. Hard work did not mean that the 
work was without joy. Being close to Nature and close to God were some of the joys of farming just as 
they are today, although the work in those days was more strenuous since it was all done with hand tools 
and with oxen or the wife and kids pulling a single-bladed plow. 

This huge amount of labor with hand tools and ox-drawn plows was necessary to turn raw desert 
into a bountiful farm. It was labor paid for by the sweat of the entire farming family. Parents, children, 
grandparents, all did the work. Since the life expectancy was only about forty years, the grandparents 
were still young enough to work until their dying day. It was this huge amount of labor, the countless 
hours between sun up and sun down, the months and years laboring under the hot sun without pay but 
with the hope of a good harvest; it was this as well as the land itself that the moneylenders stole when 
they foreclosed a family farm. They did not foreclose on empty, undeveloped land. Just as the bankers do 
today, they waited until all of the work had been done and the crop ready to harvest before swindling the 
peasants out of their labor, their produce, and their property. 

The man-years of labor plus the price of the land plus the cost of whatever mud-brick buildings 
that were part of the farm, would make it too expensive for the moneylenders to buy and then resell 
for a profit. The farms were too expensive to buy but not too expensive to steal. Secret Fraud #2 of the 
Sumerian Swindle brought the moneylenders huge profits: "Collateral that is worth more than the loan, 
is the banker's greatest asset." In addition, Secret Fraud #2 went hand-in-claw with Secret Fraud #4 to 


steal huge numbers of farms: "Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral." 
What did this mean to the victims of the moneylenders? 

Returning to the example from above of only one banker in the world with only two pieces of 
money to loan, let's look deeper. The farmer and the merchant have both borrowed one shekel of silver 
and they must each repay a shekel and a half to the moneylender. If both the farmer and the merchant 
have a bad year and cannot repay even the shekel that they borrowed, the moneylender takes the farmer's 
farm and takes the merchant's shop and house as recompense. And so the moneylender gets an entire 
farm, a shop and a house for only two shekels. These, he can sell for many shekels worth of grain and 
other goods. So, his profits are enormous. "Collateral that is worth more than the loan, is the banker's 
greatest asset", was a great swindle. It is the pawn-broker's method that is still used today. 

This technique was used by the moneylenders of 4000 BC - even if they lost their principal, 
they gained even more by confiscating the collateral . Even if the principle was repaid, if the interest was 
not repaid , then they would not only get their principle back but they could additionally confiscate the 
property of the debtor as well! This was a powerful discovery! They could make money-on-a-loan and 
also make money even when the loan went bad. Indeed, because of the intrinsic fraud of the Sumerian 
Swindle, some loans would always go bad. 

Under the relentless arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle, it was difficult to lose when lending 
either grain or silver. The arithmetical numbers are eternally unwavering and the fate of mortal man 
is eternally at the mercy of both gods and moneylenders. When the principal and interest are repaid, 
there is a profit. And when the loan is not repaid, there is still a profit. But this was just the very simple 
beginnings of the business science of legalized crime that has been passed down to modern man in the 
form of banking, mortgages and credit card debt. 

During the period of high Ubaidian Culture between 5000-4000 BC, while the Ubaidian people 
were founding the ancient cities of Adab, Eridu, Kish, Kullab, Lagash, Larsa, Nippur, and Ur, the 
Ubaidian moneylenders were busy defrauding and swindling their own people out of their lands and 
property. But the secret did not really become a major power in the world until after the arrival of the 
Sumerians and the invention of writing and numbers. What had been a swindle at a local level using 
counting beads and clay markers became an incredibly profitable scam supported by the invention of 
numbers and writing. But before delving into this history, let's look at this part of the Swindle a bit more 

In the ancient societies where silver was used as a form of money, manipulation of the availability 
of this commodity metal produced even greater profits. What happens when the farmer and merchant 
actually have a good year? Each of them has borrowed one shekel of silver each. Between them, they must 
repay a total of three shekels of silver. But there are only two shekels in the entire world. They sell their 
goods in the market and return to the moneylender saying, "Here is your one shekel back that we each 
borrowed, but we cannot find another shekel of silver to pay you for interest on the loan. And so, we will 
pay the interest with produce from the farm and goods from inventory". Thereby, the farmer wants to pay 
the banker with one shekel of silver and a half shekel's worth of barley. And the merchant wants to pay 
the banker with a shekel of silver and a half shekel's worth of trade goods. That seems fair doesn't it? 

But the moneylender says, "Our agreement was to repay the loan of one shekel of silver with a 
shekel and a half of silver. The loan was for silver and the repayment must also be in silver. Since you have 
paid back the one shekel principal in silver but not the half shekel of interest in silver, you forfeit your 
collateral. I will not accept repayment of the interest in trade goods of equal value because the agreement 
was to be repaid in silver." Because of a shortage of a commodity metal like silver, the thieving banker 
was again asking the impossible. And when the impossible could not be met, the banker seized the real 
property of the debtors and got it for free even though the debt could easily have been repaid with trade 
goods of equal value. And so, Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "Loans of silver repaid with 


goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral." 

The banker again is able to seize the farmer's farm and the merchant's shop even when the 
principle is repaid because the interest was not repaid in silver . From the two debtors, the banker 
demands to be repaid one shekel that, in fact, does not exist because it is a mere entry in his ledger book. 
The two debtors believe that the shekels exist but which they have been unable to earn through their 
labor because the world is so big that they cannot imagine that its supply of silver is so small that it can 
be hoarded by just a few men. And so, they believe that what the banker demanded could not be met 
and so they believe that they still owe the banker this impossible sum. And since they believe that they 
owe the money, then they accept the swindle as being an honest business error on their part. They blame 
themselves for being unable to earn the silver when the banker knows full well that it is impossible to 
earn since it either doesn't exist or he is keeping it hidden away in his strong room. So, the farmer and 
the merchant hand over their property to the banker. And the thieving banker is not in a hurry to explain 
their error in judgment because a sucker in born every minute. 

In reality, there are many more pieces of silver in the world than just two. So, in real life, not all 
of the people are defrauded equally. But the technique is the same. Even with many millions of pieces 
of silver, there are always fewer in circulation than what the account books claim are due. Even though 
everybody in society is being swindled by the bankers and moneylenders, those who are able to earn 
enough to pay their debts, feel safe and superior to those who become impoverished. So, the Sumerian 
Swindle is perpetuated because the winners feel superior to the losers; or if not superior, then at least glad 
and thankful that they are "winners" and not "losers". When moneylenders are allowed to lend at interest, 
everyone in society is a loser except the moneylenders, as you shall see. 

But to continue with this example, let's say that the merchant has a good year and makes a 
shekel and a half of the two shekels in circulation, and the farmer has a bad year and only gains a half 
shekel. The merchant feels confident and successful in having repaid the loan, more so because he sees 
the farmer's land confiscated and the farmer's wife and children dragged off in slave's collars. With his 
profits, the merchant may even buy up the confiscated land from the moneylender and so become a part 
of the criminal enterprise. But regardless of how the wealth is distributed, whenever money is loaned-at- 
interest, it creates in a ledger book the lie and the delusion that there is more money to be repaid than is 
actually in existence. 

It was true in 3000 BC and it is true today. All the bankers will tell you as they arrogantly demand 
more payments on the credit card or home mortgage: "Numbers do not lie." But what they don't tell you 
is that liars who write numbers can make the numbers lie. And all bankers, loan sharks, financiers and 
moneylenders are liars with the false numbers that they create. 

The ancient money lenders discovered Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle: "Loans of silver 
repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral." But what if the bankers could make these 
loans to tens of thousands of Mesopotamians and then quietly withdraw the silver from circulation by 
keeping it hidden in their safe houses or shipping it to another country or to another city-state? Once 
the loans had been made, once the clay contracts had been written, once the agreements were presented 
to the gods and confirmed by the scribes, the people were trapped. By working in conspiring groups of 
moneylender guilds, the moneylenders could then claim both principle and interest in silver when there 
was not enough silver in circulation to pay off all agreements. There was not enough silver in circulation 
because the moneylenders were hiding it in their strong boxes. As subversive cartels, the moneylenders 
could become the owners of vast properties simply by hoarding enough silver so that there was not 
enough available for their debtors to make their payments. 

These ancient moneylenders discovered the secret of using a commodity metal such as silver or 
gold as a form of money so that they could swindle the wealth of their fellow men simply by controlling 
the abundance or dearth of these commodity metals. By stipulating repayment in silver, the amount of 


which was both limited in quantity and could be hoarded out of circulation, they were able to rake the 
wealth of the ancient Near East into their own barns and counting houses. 

My simple example of two pieces of money and only one banker holds true even when the 
amount of money is in the trillions and the number of swindling bankers is in the tens of thousands as 
they are today But the swindle and fraud of these techniques are still the same. Interest on a loan, even 
the tiniest interest in thousandths of one percent, still creates money on a ledger book that does not in 
reality exist. And so, whether we are discussing two farmers in ancient Mesopotamia or the millions of 
indebted farmers and home owners around the world today, they are still being swindled by the bankers 
and moneylenders who use sleight-of-hand arithmetical tricks to create the illusion that what you pay 
back must be more than what you borrow. 

Was this "legal"? Most of the traditions that were handed down to the people of Sumeria and 
Mesopotamia were just that, traditions. In those days, there were no codified laws that everybody 
followed. It was still a growing civilization of largely illiterate people who were led by literate thieves 
and swindlers who made their own rules as circumstances required. It was a civilization of awilum [the 
Haves] who made it a part of their "tradition" to take whatever they could from the muskenum [the 
Have-Nots] and to profit by enslaving them to the loan-sharking rackets called "debt" and "interest-on-a- 

If the defrauded peasant tried to get justice in the court system, he was in for a difficult time. In 
the first place, there was no court system as in modern times but, rather, an informal court presided over 
by a judge without jury. In Sumerian times, just as in modern times, the laws are as they "have always 
been", written by the awilum [the Haves] to protect what they have and written entirely for their own 
benefit. In the Mesopotamian courts of law, as Edward Chiera, Professor of Assyriology at the University 
of Chicago, wrote: "The loser must either pay a sum of money or become the slave of the winner until 
such time as he does pay. It was a very dangerous proceeding for peasants to bring their grievances 
to court because their chance of obtaining justice was slight, and most of them ended by losing their 
freedom. I have gone over these [cuneiform] contracts with great care, trying to find out whether the 
judges made any effort to apply the law and be wholly impartial. Unfortunately, it is evident that they 
did not. The wealthy landlords kept their records in good order for generations, and quite often could 
produce a document duly signed by many witnesses, which attested their right to ownership and thereby 
closed the case. But the trouble was that the landlords had scribes of their own and a certain group of 
people who always acted as their witnesses. There was nothing easier, in view of the fact that the peasants 
did not know how to read, than to juggle a few figures or to alter measurements; the mistake would not 
be discovered for many years." [ 35 ] 

But these were the cases where the cuneiform records clearly showed the consistently fraudulent 
and biased nature of the Mesopotamian "law courts". If the cuneiform records were not sufficiently 
precise or if they were not adequate enough for a moneylender to swindle the peasant's property, then 
the moneylenders offered an ingenious swindle as an alternate choice. To "prove" their innocence and 
"prove" their honest piety before the gods, they offered to acquiesce to the will of the gods, if the peasant 
would accept the river test. 

A peasant could vow with the gods as his witness that the landlords and moneylenders were 
defrauding him. Or he could vow with the gods as his witness that he was telling the truth and that the 
moneylenders were liars. In such a case, he could claim his "right" to be subjected to the river test. The 
event was timed with a water clock consisting of a clay bowl with a tiny hole in the bottom, slowing 
sinking in a larger bowl of water. The peasant would be held underwater until the allotted time had 
passed and his bowl had completely sunk. If he didn't drown during that time, then the gods had sided 
with him and the landlord would have to give back the property or the money that was swindled. 

At first, this might seem somewhat fair. The only problem was that the moneylenders controlled 


the size of the hole in the bottom of the bowl. So, a bowl with a tiny hole was given for the peasant's 
test. And since they usually drowned as a result, the peasants soon learned that it was better to refuse to 
take the test. Refusing the river test implied that they did not have the gods behind them and that the 
moneylender was right in taking their property. It was an ingenious swindle in which the moneylenders 
were able to offer their own piety and trust in the gods as "proof". After all, they were willing to endure 
the river test, too, just as long as the peasant tried it first. With the river test as "proof," they could avoid 
accusations of fraud while stealing the lands of the muskenum [Have-Nots] even as the superstitious and 
god-fearing people looked on in wonder. 

This "legal" system of Sumeria was never questioned by those who lived under its thrall simply 
because it had "always been here". The rich had always enslaved the poor since before the Sumerians had 
arrived from the South. Money lending was a total fraud in every definition of the word, just as it is today. 
But it is only in modern times, after all of these centuries filled with the warfare, starvation and disease 
purposely created by the moneylenders that we can ask: "Just because it has always been here, does this 
mean that fraud, swindling and betrayal are legitimate ways for Mankind to follow? If the rich got their 
wealth by stealing it from the poor, should they be allowed to keep it?" The awilum [Haves] said, "Yes, it 
is mine!" and continued to enslave their fellow men with usury and deceit while the muskenum [Have- 
Nots] never thought about it simply because money-lending-at-interest has "always been here". Because it 
has "always been here," no one has ever asked, "Should it be allowed to continue?" or "Should the thieves 
be allowed to keep what they have stolen?" or "Why not hang the bankers and take back the wealth that 
they have stolen?" 

The Lifeline of the Canal System 

Without water, the crusty and dusty soil of Mesopotamia could never have grown the world's first 
civilization. The flood season of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers is between April and June so it is not 
well-timed for planting. Yet, through irrigation ditches and canals, the Two Rivers were made to irrigate 
thousands of square miles of barley and wheat and green gardens. With a dependable and carefully 
regulated irrigation system, Mesopotamia thrived. 

It was this dependence upon the regulated flow of water that was most responsible for the 
necessity of civil government. Digging canals required well-ordered gangs of workers whose labor had 
to be evenly proportioned. Their food rations had to be equally weighed and fairly distributed. Proper 
amounts of water for each field had to be timed with the water clocks. The volume of water for each field 
had to be calculated. The canals and ditches had to be maintained against erosion and cleared of weed 
invasion. All of this, plus the numerous runners, cooks, suppliers, carpenters, rope-makers, boatmen, 
and ancillary workers of all kinds, had to be efficiently organized and administered. This was one of the 
major responsibilities of the city governments throughout Mesopotamia because without water and the 
resulting crops, everybody would die of starvation. 

These life-giving waterways were also important for trade. Indeed, trade was necessary for the 
very survival of these city-states because Mesopotamia lacked everything needed to build a civilization. 
Wood, metal and stone could only be obtained from distant places either through trade or by military 
force. And trade required transportation. 

In ancient Mesopotamia, the most efficient way of transporting goods was by water. Most places 
in Mesopotamia could be reached by the Tigris and the Euphrates Rivers or along their tributary rivers 
and canals. From the mouth of the Two Rivers, ships sailed down the Persian Gulf to Melukkha (the 
Indus Valley) and the East Arabian ports of Magan (Oman) and Dilmun (Bahrain). From the western- 
most loop of the Euphrates, a relatively short donkey caravan could reach the Mediterranean Sea. Again, 
civil administration was necessary to regulate this river traffic and to tax the cargos of the various 


merchants. Controlling ship traffic had both an economic and military use. So, the kings in every city 
took special interest in this work. 

Trade by river was not some minor pastime by primitive aborigines in reed boats, as some 
modern readers might assume of the people of those ancient times. It was a well- organized, sophisticated 
and hugely lucrative industrial enterprise from its earliest inception involving large networks of both 
wholesale and retail traders and their related suppliers and customers. 

As an example of scale, Sumerian ships in the third millennium could hold about twenty- five 
tons and Babylonian ships in the first millennium about forty tons of cargo. A cuneiform text mentions 
thirteen thousand minas (roughly seven tons) of copper as part of one ship's cargo. This was the goods 
of just one importer. The metal came in ingots of up to four talents (about 200 pounds) shaped like a 
cowhide with legs at each of the corners so that it could be lifted and carried by four men. 

In the earliest days of Sumeria, the merchants and tradesmen did their business with the temples 
as the main supplier of both export goods and the recipient of the imported items. But as their wealth 
increased, the moneylenders and merchants became independent of any religious ties and worked for 
their own personal profits. Boat captains, away for so long from their homeports, have always had an 
independent bent. So, there were plenty of opportunities for the ships' captains and the boatmen to 
form working alliances with the merchants who hired their services. In this way, the merchants and 
moneylenders had close relationships with the ship captains. 

The principal exports from Sumeria to Dilmun (Bahrain) were garments, grain and oil provided 
by private businessmen. Contracts were drawn up, giving the value of the goods in terms of silver and 
stating the agreed silver value for Dilmun copper to be brought back by the return trade. But there were 
some important differences between how the merchants and the moneylenders dealt with one another 
that depended upon whether transportation was by land or by ship. 

In the caravan trade with Capadocia (Central Turkey), the moneylenders who were financing 
a trade agent were entitled to two-thirds of the total profits, with a guaranteed minimum return of 50 
percent on his outlay and no risk to his capital. On the other hand, in the sea trade to Dilmun (Bahrain), 
the entrepreneur normally received, instead of a share in the profits, a fixed return. If the investor did 
become a full partner in the venture, he then shared the risks as well as any profits. The more favorable 
conditions for the sea trader as against the caravan leader are related to the fact that the trade with 
Dilmun was a "closed shop", admission to which was a matter of great difficulty; it needed technical 
skill to undertake the actual voyage, while it was necessary for the trader to have personal contacts on 
the island before he could trade there. [ 36 ] In other words, from the earliest times, those who practiced 
international sea trade with India, Oman and Bahrain, did so as a closed cartel of merchants and 
moneylenders who had a closer and more trusting relationship with one another than would be found in 
the more common kinds of business arrangements. The Sumerian merchants and moneylenders formed 
cartels at a very early time and practiced monopoly finance. Only those who were part of this elite in- 
group were allowed to trade in the distant ports. 

With ships, there was a great chance for loss of the cargo that could not be recovered if the ship 
sank or if a ship did not return because of piracy or even if the merchant and captain had decided to 
steal the cargo and immigrate to a foreign land. With a missing ship, there was no way to know what 
had happened and no way to even know where to start looking for it. So, better terms were given to the 
merchants who traveled by ship as an incentive for them to return. But if a caravan did not return, there 
were ways of tracking it down, so heftier profits could be squeezed out of the caravan traders. 

Once the trade goods arrived in Mesopotamia either by ship or by caravan, they were most easily 
transported throughout the region by the many boats that plied the canals and rivers. The large numbers 
of boats of all sizes can be surmised from a single letter sent to the King of Ur by his governor Ibbi-Sin 
who had been sent to secure grain for the besieged city of Ur. Ibbi-Sin acquired the necessary grain 


but sent a letter to Ur asking for six hundred boats of one hundred twenty gur each, that is, of holding 
a capacity of about 186,807 barrels. Thus, when thinking about the amounts of goods and wealth that 
flowed through Mesopotamia, one should not think in terms of a few donkeys with packs but, rather, of 
huge amounts of wholesale and retail goods, comparable in ratio though on a smaller scale, to the goods 
flowing through a modern sea port. We are studying here a sophisticated society, not merely an ancient 

The greed of the moneylenders was just as voracious as today but with fewer restrictions. From 
the very earliest times, the Treasonous Class had learned how to increase their profits by restricting the 
flow of goods. Certainly, they did not like to pay taxes to the kings or the tribal chiefs through whose 
lands their caravans had to pass. Taxes meant higher prices to their customers. There was only so much 
their customers were willing to pay so higher prices reduced sales and ate into their profit margins. 

Transportation costs were always a problem since the multitudes of boatmen were free to charge 
whatever they wanted for shipping. And so, to control these problems, the merchants organized the river 
traffic into guilds of boatmen who controlled all of the shipping fees. This form of monopoly allowed 
the merchants to further squeeze the small farmers. The boatmen could charge the poor people a higher 
price to ship their produce than they would charge the bigger merchants who gave them more work 
though at a lower price per trip. Through such cartels, the merchants saved money, the boatmen made 
more money and the poor peasants were further impoverished. Because poor people always suffer the 
most from high prices, when the economy became too difficult for the poor, they easily fell into the 
clutches of the moneylenders who swindled them out of their farms, their families and their freedom. 

Through monopoly of wholesale imports and distribution channels, the Treasonous Class learned 
how to gain more wealth for themselves simply by getting control of the choke points in the trade routes. 
They perfected Secret Fraud #21: "Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke 
points and kill the body." These Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] learned how to make 
more money by monopolizing transportation and raising prices as well as profiting from the ripple effect 
of a slowly spreading poverty. By the time the Assyrians took control of Mesopotamia, the Sumerian 
word for "boatman" had become the same as the word for "thief". Thus, the Treasonous Class corrupted 
the boatmen who were a vital part of civilization. 

Trade in Metals 

Just as in modern times, the trade in metals was done on an industrial scale. There was no 
room for the small merchant except as an agent of the big wholesalers or for the small-time peddler 
of finished goods loaning a few shekels to the local yokels. Importing of metals was a field open only 
to the wealthiest of citizens. These citizens were the kings, the temples, and the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders]. Because metals were so vital to both the civilian economy and to the military, those who 
dealt in these commodities could only be the awilum [the Haves]. 

Because Mesopotamia did not have any metals in the region, everything had to be imported . Of 
course, all metals are very heavy and whether you import the raw ore and smelt it yourself or import 
metallic ingots, you need lots of labor in the form of miners, laborers, donkeys, carts, ships, boats, 
tool and weapon craftsmen, and mid-level merchants to get it to market. Thus, the commodity metal 
dealers were among the wealthiest of the awilum [Haves] . It was a closed society that included among its 
members the kings, top temple priests, the moneylenders and the richest merchants. Everyone else were 
either loyal subalterns, minor partners or employees who worked for them. 

By 2900 BC, copper was in common use as vases, bowls, mirrors, cosmetic pots, fishhooks, 
chisels, daggers, hoes and axes. Copper ingots were shipped both overland from the Iranian plateau or by 
ship on the Persian Gulf from Magan (Oman) and Melukhkha (the Indus Valley). Analysis of copper and 


bronze objects of this period show that in Sumerian times it was the surface ores which were used and 
not the deeper lying ones (which occur as sulphides); thus no deep mining was involved. 

Iron of meteoric origin began to be used from 3000 BC onwards mainly in beads and trinkets 
because it was too brittle to be useful for much else. It wasn't until after 1500 BC, when the Hittites 
discovered that iron could be made extremely hard by the process that we know as carbonizing, which 
was achieved by the blacksmith who repeatedly hammered the glowing iron that had been heated on a 
fire of glowing charcoal. This new technique gradually spread throughout the Near East and came into 
use in Mesopotamia from about 1300 BC. [ 37 ] But in all of these centuries, the metallic trade was carried 
out only by the rich and the powerful. 

Copper, bronze, zinc, lead, iron, silver and gold, all had both commercial and military uses. But 
it was not the hard and useful metals that drove the machinery of commerce and war, it was the soft 
and useless metals like gold and silver that drove the moneylenders mad. With small amounts of silver 
and gold, they could buy everything on earth including the bodies and souls of Men. The moneylenders 
discovered Secret #5 of the Sumerian Swindle: "The debtor is the slave of the lender." Therefore, to enslave 
the world, the moneylenders merely needed to put everyone into debt. 


Chapter 6 
Time in History, Warfare and Money Lending 

Although it was a tradition passed down to the Sumerians that all culture came from the town 
of Eridu, it was from the much larger town of Uruk that Mesopotamian culture began to flourish. Uruk 
is the Sumerian city from which the modern state of Iraq got its name. Uruk is where both the sky god, 
Anu, and the goddess of love, Inanna, resided in their great temples. 

At its height, Uruk probably had 50,000 to 80,000 residents living in 6 square kilometres of 
walled area, the largest city in the world at its time. Uruk was one of the world's first cities with a dense 
population. Uruk also saw the rise of the centralized state in Mesopotamia with a full-time bureaucracy, 
military, and the stratified social classes of the "Haves" and "Have-Nots". All of this was accomplished by 
3700 BC by the Ubaidians before writing was invented. Cities that coexisted with Uruk at this time were 
only about 10 hectares in area, showing that it was a vastly larger and more complex city than any of its 
contemporaries. To the rural Sumerians who began buying up the foreclosed farms from the Ubaidian 
moneylenders, Uruk, with its high walls surrounding two and three story mud-brick buildings and its 
five story mud-brick temple, must have been an awesome wonder. 

Uruk was an important city because it represented a shift from small, agricultural villages to 
a larger urban center. And it is from here around 3200 BC to 3000 BC that the crude bookkeeping 
scratchings on clay that the Ubaidians had been using were turned into the world's first writing by 
the Sumerians. With this invention, the dawn of written history began. And through the trade routes 
between Mesopotamia and Egypt, the invention of writing spread to the land of the pharaohs. 

Because the Sumerians bought the land from the Ubaidian moneylenders and so acquired 
control gradually, they were able to learn the cultural, religious, political, business and social traditions 
of the Ubaidians, peacefully without warfare. The greedy Ubaidian moneylenders were eager to sell the 
swindled properties for silver and to train the new immigrants in the ways of ownership and confiscation. 
The Ubaidian "Have-Nots" could not prevent the new arrivals from displacing them because they were 
betrayed by the "Haves" who were, in turn, protected by the king. So, whether the poor Ubaidians 
worked in the fields for the Ubaidian moneylenders or for the new owners of the property, the pay was 
the same. 

The new Sumerian owners did not come as conquerors so much as they appeared as the new 
landlords of the land and all that was on it. All that was on it included whatever slaves, hired hands, 
and poor farmers who were working the land for subsistence wages. As their numbers increased 
through immigration of their relatives, the Sumerians were soon masters of the land. As co-owners 
and social equals with the Ubaidian awilum [Haves], the moneylenders taught them everything about 
Mesopotamian society, inventions, agriculture, urban management and religion. 

Once their children were grown up, within a single generation, the Sumerians had mastered it all 
and had begun to add their own ingenuity to the culture. As more Sumerians bought land and moved 
their foreign relatives onto the property, all traces of the indigenous Ubaidian culture vanished. A new 
people speaking a new language had become the owners of Mesopotamia. The Sumerians continued with 
all of the cultural traditions that "had always been here", the religion, the social structure, the inventions 
and the frauds and swindles of lending- at- interest. 


Sumerian Mathematics and the Babylonian Calendar 

Writing on clay tablets not only allowed the Sumerians to communicate over long distances but it 
created a whole new way of owning property as well. Actually living on a farm or in a town house became 
secondary to possessing a clay tablet that said that the owner of the tablet was the owner of the property 
Written deeds of ownership conferred to the "Haves" both power and wealth on a much grander scale. 
They could "own" vast estates without having to physically live on those properties. 

From the temple priests, the Sumerians learned the myths and the indigenous religion. From 
the greedy Ubaidian moneylenders, they learned the ways of land ownership and lending-at-interest. 
Enslaving their fellow men to fraudulent "interest-on-a-loan" scams was already in place when they 
arrived. They merely made the system more efficient and productive of profit. The Sumerian Swindle 
is the basis of everything that we have today in the modern world of banking, stock markets, financial 
schemes, investment frauds, credit card scams, foreclosed homes, money laundering and national debt. 

With writing, the Sumerians made it impossible for men's memories to forget their promises 
about loan and rental agreements. No longer could a farmer, whose property was being confiscated, claim 
that the verbal agreement was different than what the moneylender had claimed. Now, their contracts 
and business agreements were literally "written in stone". Once the clay tablet was written upon and 
baked in an oven, it was literally a stone-hard clay brick. As far as it's durability, modern archeologists 
today can read these contracts just as clearly as the day they were written 5,000 years ago. Not even 
modern computer disks or paper documents have that kind of longevity. So again, don't look down 
upon these ancient people as mere "primitives" because they accomplished things than not even modern 
science has been able to equal to this day. Along with writing, mathematics became an important and 
powerful tool that enabled the Sumerians to reach heights of never-before achieved wealth. 

Because "it has always been here" some of you modern people may find it difficult to imagine that 
there was ever any other kind of counting system other than the base- 10 method that we use today. It 
has only been in the last five hundred years that the Arabic numerals of zero through nine have become 
common and popular. These allow us to simply and easily make complex calculations. But this system 
was only developed because of the previous seven millennia of experimentation with many other systems 
of counting. The first of these counting and mathematics systems was the Sumerian system of base-60 

Since most of us have ten digits on our hands and toes, it may seem odd that anyone would want 
to count by multiples of 60 instead of multiples of 10. But there was a very practical reason to count with 
a base-60 system. It may have gotten started by figuring the monthly rations for workers at two meals per 
day over a 30-day month. But it proved to be much more useful than that. 

In a society where people were paid for their work with food rations as well as with silver, a 
number 60-based counting system was very useful. The Sumerians were a very practical people in 
everything that they did. Their numbering system had a lot of benefits, especially when dividing up goods 
among many people. With a base-60 counting system, physical things could be easily portioned out. 
Rents paid in produce or wages paid in portions of grain, were easily calculated with a base-60 system. A 
base-60 system has many more factors than our base- 10 decimal system. The factors of 60 are 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 
10, 12, 15, 20, 30 as compared with only 1,2, and 5 in our base-10 system. Thus, a greater variety of equal 
portions could be evenly divided and distributed with a base-60 system than with our base-10 system. 

This means that fractions and weights and measures could be expressed with great precision 
and individual portions could be evenly divided out of a community lot. [ 38 ] Also, portions could be 
easily divided for groups of people each having different numbers of individuals in the group. And in an 
agricultural society where several families of varying numbers of individuals would work on the same 
project, being able to equally divide the harvest between them or to portion out the individual shares of 


the ration payment to them was an advantage for this kind of number system. 

Although the base-60 counting system may seem odd and difficult for us to understand, it was 
really quite simple. Its only real defect was that it didn't have a zero. The Mesopotamians used their base- 
60 numbering system for 3000 years before it was replaced by Roman numerals, while we have used the 
Arabic numerals for only 500 years and the metric system for only 200 years. Take a moment to think 
about the relative length of those time spans and how young as a People we modern folks really are. 

One of the advantages for the base-60 system was that Sumerian weights and measures were 
also base-60. One hundred and eighty barley grains (3 x 60) made one shekel weight, sixty shekels made 
one mina, 60 minas made one talent . This Sumerian system is hinted at in the Bible where individuals 
demanded their "portion" while payments were made in shekels of silver. A shekel is about ten grams or 
less than a third of an ounce. The advantage of using the same base-60 for weights and measures was that 
the math rules were the same as when calculating fractions. The divisors for conversion of one weight 
to the next lowest level were, like the denominators, standard. This numbering system became standard 
for the entire ancient Near East for twenty centuries. [ 39 ] And of course, the 60 seconds in a minute, 60 
minutes in an hour, 360 degrees in a circle, 15-year and 30-year mortgages, are all our inheritance of 
Sumerian genius that we still use today. 

These measurements and their significance for the modern day swindles of the Jews (such as 15 
and 30 year mortgages) will be covered in Volume III, The Blood-Suckers of Judah. But for now, please 
understand that even though these Sumerian people might seem to you to be very ancient and very 
primitive, it must be understood that they were just like you and me, homo sapiens, with all of the same 
genetic intelligence as a modern person and the same crafty shrewdness of a modern loan-shark, thief or 

To get an idea of the Sumerian skills in mathematics, they developed equations containing two 
unknowns, using plus or minus in a single algebraic statement. They did not use mathematical proofs 
because their main interest was in practical solutions to problems and not to mathematical theories. Also, 
they tried at all times to use the base-60 counting system so that it would not produce irregular numbers 
that were neither prime to nor a factor of base-60. They used the Pythagorean theorem centuries before 
the Greeks. They understood geometric shapes and formulae. They developed algebraic methods. They 
calculated pi to 3 and l/8th. 

Their mathematical tables dealt with multiplication, reciprocals (for division), squares and cubes, 
square roots and cube roots, exponential tables, logarithms, and metrological tables of length, area, 
monetary conversion, and weight units. They solved equations with up to six unknowns and even to the 
eighth degree. Solid geometric figures were dealt with in practical problems which related to bricks and 
brickworks, excavations of canals, and earthwork constructions such as walls, dams, and ramps. They 
calculated practical problems such as prices, commerce, inheritance or division of property, the water 
clock, field plans, herd growth, reed bundles, and standardized measuring containers. 

With such a varied and precise system of numbers, not only were the Sumerians able to create 
the world's first civilization but also they used their math skills to finely tune the Sumerian Swindle to 
its present-day perfection. "Interest-on-a-loan", "usury", "time payments' and that diabolical invention 
known as "compound interest", were all refined to a high business science by the Sumerians. 

The Sumerian landowners and moneylenders used a funnel in the middle of an ox-drawn plow 
for dropping seeds into a furrow. With this invention, they were able to precisely seed an entire field 
and to calculate in advance how much seed would be needed for every field to a precision of just one 
seed kernel. With such math skills combined with greed and craftiness, the Sumerian moneylenders 
developed a finely honed pincer and shackle for extracting every shekel from the purses of the people 
around them. From the skills of planting fields to a precision of a single seed grain, to calculating exact 
volumes of water for irrigated fields along with precise times of watering both during the day and night, 


calculating rations for work crews and profits from investments, the Sumerian awilum [Haves] became 
master schemers. 

But wealth, itself, is made over a period of time. And time was something else these people 
learned to manipulate. The ancient Mesopotamians were aware of both the lunar and solar calendar, but 
the lunar calendar took precedence. In fact, in their mythology the Sumerians depicted the moon as the 
father of the sun. An intercalary month was added to guarantee that the religious festivals, which were 
connected to the lunar calendar, were observed at the proper time. Gradually, by the eighth century BC 
a regular intercalation of seven months every nineteen years was established; its accuracy in reconciling 
the lunar and solar calendars is still admired. By the fourth century BC, mathematical astronomy was 
used for this intercalation. The calendar produced was called the Metonic Cycle, which was the basis of 
the Babylonian calendar which the Jews use today. Yes, the Jews of today, though they boast about being 
the first Adam-and-Eve-original-people, actually prove the fallacy of their ridiculous claims in so many, 
many ways. Their use of the Babylonian calendar, which they merely re-named "the Jewish calendar", is 
one of the proofs that they are liars since the Babylonians lived tens of centuries before there were any 
Jews - but more about this later. 

Through observation and calculation, the Mesopotamians were able to compile tables of fixed 
stars and the distances between them. The results were amazing considering the available equipment: 
tubes used as viewfinders, the water clock, a rudimentary sundial, and a kind of shadow clock. The 
distance between the stars found on the Tropic of Cancer was even measured using three systems: (1) 
time between the passages of two stars at the meridian as measured with a water clock, (2) the arc, and 
(3) length according to either linear measurement or according to degrees. 

The mathematical astronomy of Mesopotamia was highly sophisticated. Basic knowledge of 
astronomy was collected and organized relating to the moon, the position of the planets, solstices, 
eclipses, equinoxes, Sirius phenomena, meteors, comets, and so on. The tables of new and full moons 
were accurate. In fact, it was a Babylonian astronomer, Kidenas, who calculated the length of the solar 
year with a margin of error of 4 minutes and 32.65 seconds. [ 40 ] Thus, you can see how very intelligent 
and precise the knowledge of these ancient people was. They were not stupid. So, do not misunderstand 
that these were modern people who were living in ancient times and we are ancient people living in 
modern times. And their skills at calculating interest-on-a-loan was as precise as any modern banker. 

By developing an accurate way to divide the weeks and hours, workers could be better controlled 
and expenditures planned. With accurate ways to predict the seasons, planting and harvesting could be 
regulated. The festivals and feasts could be planned for the entire country with accurate times prescribed. 
With planning in relation to time, came the ability to plan and coordinate the movements of people, the 
logistics and projected profits from business deals, the coordination of armies and the profits from war. 
And when it comes to calculating profits, nothing is more profitable for a moneylender than is war. 

3000 BC Bronze Age Sumerian Civilization 

As the year 3000 BC dawned, the new invention of writing coincided with many other inventions 
and discoveries both from Sumerian genius as well as from the peoples living in distant countries. 
This era was also the approximate beginning of the Bronze Age where men could set aside their brittle 
implements of obsidian and flint and their bendable tools of copper and could make use of a stronger 
alloy. For the first time, bronze could be used for all of the tools and weapons that less durable materials 
had been an inadequate substitute. By mixing copper and tin in their furnaces, this new metal alloy gave 
Mankind tough materials for his religious sculptures, corrosion-resistant fittings for his ships, sharp tips 
for his arrows and cutting edges for his swords and daggers. Bronze enabled civilization to thrive and war 
to become more deadly. 


To again repeat, metals as well as everything else except for mud, clay and reeds had to be 
imported into Sumeria. Because Sumeria was the bread basket of the ancient Near East, such things 
as grain, flax and wool clothing, dates and woven goods could be used for barter. Because the trade 
routes were long and hazardous and the volume of goods to be shipped in wholesale lots was large, 
only the awilum [Haves] could practice the import-export business. Smaller merchants worked for the 
wholesalers and, in turn, distributed goods through traveling agents and peddlers. Thus, the flow of 
profits were then, as they are today, always siphoned to the top. The highest profits were in foreign trade 
where monopoly of goods was maintained by the big merchants who could distribute through a family 
network of retail shops and traveling peddlers. 

Roads suitable for wagons were few. Long-distance traffic was usually conducted by donkeys 
carrying packs. Such donkey caravans could follow the most primitive paths and the narrowest mountain 
trails allowing the merchants to penetrate to all of the outlying villages in the deepest mountains and the 
most distant oasis. The length of a daily stage of a caravan was between twenty- five and thirty kilometers. 
The load of an individual donkey varied from 130 minas (65 kilograms) to 150 minas (75 kilograms). 
From these recorded data, we can estimate the times, distances and quantities of goods that the ancient 
merchants could handle. 

Wagons were used for short hauls such as transporting grain to local granaries. Farther north, in 
Upper Mesopotamia and in Syria, roads were more important than rivers and canals. Wagons were used 
for loads too bulky and heavy to be carried on donkey back. The ability to carry such heavy and unwieldy 
loads as logs of cedar, pine, and cypress over great distances on uneven terrain implied the maintenance 
of ancient wagon roads. As for building mountain roads for carrying lumber, even greater engineering 
skill was required. 

River traffic in Mesopotamia was always heavy. Cuneiform tablets record the transportation of 
grain, cattle, fish, milk, vegetables, oil, fruit, wool, stone, bricks, leather, and people over the network of 
canals, for which clay "canal maps" have been found. As early as the third millennium BC, Mesopotamian 
seagoing ships sailed to distant lands for raw materials. Gold, copper, lapis lazuli, pearls (called "fish 
eyes"), ivory and ivory objects (such as combs, boxes, figurines, and furniture decorations), dates, and 
onions were traded. All of this became the business of the Sumerians as they bought up farms and shops 
from the Ubaidian moneylenders and married into the Ubaidian moneylender families. 

Although Uruk was a larger city, drawing its wealth from the agricultural productivity of the soil, 
the city of Ur became more important for its trade links. Because of the less efficient and rough roads, 
traders transported large cargos by water routes whenever possible. So, this should be remembered 
because it is important to the thesis of this history that all river shipping ended at Ur . From there, goods 
were packed on vessels that were able to navigate the bays and lagoons as far as the islands of Failaka 
and Bahrain. Thus, merchants of Ur had a particular advantage over the merchants of all other cities in 
Mesopotamia. It was from Ur that they were in contact with all of the cities of the Fertile Crescent via 
the rivers and canals as well as those lands reached by ship across the Persian Gulf- Dilmun (Bahrain), 
Magan (Oman), Melukhkha (the Indus Valley), the Arabian Peninsula and the land of Punt (Somalia). 
This far-ranging knowledge of distant lands gave the merchants of Ur a very important and unique 
perspective on not only trade but also on world events. 

The route around the Arabian peninsula and into the Red Sea was navigated by 3000 BC. This 
early familiarity of the awilum [Haves] with all of those trade routes and all of those distant peoples so 
early in their history, would be of continuing profit to them throughout the ages. Lengthy journeys were 
undertaken in the Red Sea, Indian Ocean, and Persian Gulf in the third, second, and first millennia BC. 
Their ancient ships hugged the coasts and hopped from safe harbor to safe harbor only in the daylight 
hours. So, trade was naturally controlled by whichever people controlled those harbors. Much of the 
shipping in the Persian Gulf was controlled by the Elamites [ 41 ] who could charge a tax for use of their 



As the Bronze Age progressed, the merchants and moneylenders no longer were strictly attached 
to the temples or to the palace as paid middlemen but they became independent businessmen with their 
own interests and investments. Certainly, both the temple and the palace employed underlings who 
managed the business of those institutions. But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] , as they would 
be called in later millennia, worked increasingly for their own private profits. 

Independent businessmen though they were, they could not do business without the king because 
the king offered protection throughout his territory. The king guaranteed diplomatic prestige and official 
introductions to foreign courts and to foreign cities outside of his territory. In return, the merchants and 
moneylenders offered the kings and the temple priests first choice of the best imports of foreign goods as 
well as political intelligence about foreign peoples. 

"Intelligence" is a polite way of saying the word, "spy". It should not be underestimated the 
high value that kings placed on the information that spies brought to them. Spying was not usually the 
merchant's primary reason for traveling to distant lands. However, the perfect disguise and alibi for a spy 
was as a traveling merchant because in those days merchants were always welcome in every community. 

Not so much in modern times but most certainly in the ancient world, a trader or traveling 
merchant was always a unique and much-admired visitor to every town both big and small. A caravan 
of pack-asses was always an instant attraction to the slow and sleepy towns and villages of ancient times. 
Those strangers from distant lands always had new and unique things to sell or to barter. And if one was 
lucky enough to share a table with them at a public tavern over a pot of beer, amazing stories of distant 
places and fantastic goblins and strange creatures were sure to be traded in good fun. Or even if one was 
not lucky enough to hear the stories first hand, the tavern keeper or the palace servants were sure to re- 
tell to their relatives and friends what they had overheard when the merchants were in audience with 
the king. Gossip was a primary way for information to be passed around in small communities. Who 
needs a telephone when all of the neighbors talk to one another? The ancient people were more advanced 
than we modern people in this respect because in modern communities neighbors no longer talk to 
neighbors because they are all indoors watching the Jewish lies on television. Merely by not knowing 
their neighbors, modern people are less human than their own ancient forbearers. 

The wealthiest moneylenders who invested in trade expeditions stayed safely at home port 
managing their shops, their farms, their servants and their various manufacturing industries. But their 
partners, the traveling merchants, did more than just barter and haggle and make profits. They were the 
eyes and ears of their business partners as well as of the king. The traveling merchants were the premier 
spies of the ancient Near East. They were spies who worked equally for both sides in politics and in secret 
for themselves, alone. As merchant-spies, they sold goods and information to whomever had the silver 
while they used their spy networks to enrich themselves. 

This spying function of the ancient merchants has been very much overlooked by modern 
archeologists and historians. Perhaps the historians think that the kings and armies of the ancient Near 
East went out blindly to war without scouting out the territory first; or that they would risk thirst and 
starvation without knowing where the wells and oasis were located; or that entire countries would clash 
in war spontaneously and without diplomatic reason or without military planning. So, it is a bit odd for 
the historians and archeologists to overlook this. But no matter. Let's look into this ourselves. 

Merchants have always had a unique position among all peoples, most especially among the 
ancient peoples. They were strangers and foreigners who brought unique and interesting goods from 
far places. In a time when daily life moved as leisurely as a walking ox and the peaceful silence of the 
countryside pressed in even to the small cities, there was not a lot of excitement other than the local 
festivals, wedding parties or religious events. And such events were of a well-known nature, having 
the same songs and prayers performed by the same groups of neighbors, priests and leaders "just as it 


had always been" for as long as anybody could remember. Life was slow-paced and tranquile. It was 
a tranquility unknown by modern people who are surrounded by the noise of automobile traffic, jets 
flying overhead, and the blare of amplified modern noise that passes for "music". Nature is filled with 
peacefulness and the ancient peoples lived within the peacefulness of Nature. 

But when foreign traders rode into town or village with their pack-trains of donkeys in tow, now 
that was something extraordinary! Who were these dust covered strangers with their pack donkeys and 
carts loaded with boxes and bundles and accompanied by fierce-looking guards armed with spears and 
swords, maces, bows and arrows? What kinds of rare and delightful goods did they bring with them? 
What news did they bring? What amazing stories would they tell of their adventures? What stories would 
they tell to those fortunate ones who could hear them first-hand, stories that would then be repeated 
countless times from mouth to eager ears to the farthest shepherds in the outback? Yes, the traders were a 
very welcome change to the dull routine of agrarian life throughout all of the ancient lands. 

Although these merchants traveled quietly so as to attract the least attention possible from 
bandits, they were not at all quiet when they entered a town or into the district of a city-state. Then, they 
wanted as much attention and business as possible. So, drums and trumpets and horns, tambourines and 
the loud cries of the carnival barker announced to one and to all that the merchants had arrived with 
items to sell. Aggressive self-promotion was a timeless attribute of these merchants and salesmen. But it 
took another two thousand years of self-aggrandizement before these merchant-moneylender scoundrels 
developed what is known as "chutzpah", or insolent audacity, as a necessary step toward enshrining 
themselves as the greatest show on earth and the very apple of God's eye. 

Even when the trade goods had only been obsidian blades and obsidian cores carried laboriously 
from the northern regions around Lake Van, the traders had always been welcomed even during the 
earliest Stone Age times. They brought new things that could not have been obtained without their efforts 
or without traveling long distances as a trader, oneself. And they brought news from distant places from 
over the horizon. 

In every sleepy hamlet, the traveling merchants and traders always had a special welcome. But 
even if they ran into hostile tribes, they were protected by their special merchant's threat. They threatened 
to never come back with anymore trade goods if their stuff was stolen. Since they also carried the special 
letters and seals of safe passage of the various kings, it was only the most remote and barbaric tribes 
that they had to fear. And for those, they usually had their own escort troops as well as the troops of the 
king to protect them as far as the next kingdom's borders. The merchants have always been a specially 
protected class in society. They were a class that both the rich and the poor were eager to welcome. They 
enjoyed and valued, indeed, they demanded special treatment and special protection because it brought 
them so much prestige, profits and personal safety. 

When the merchants came riding into town on their donkeys with horns blaring and drums 
pounding, it was with an air of confident bravery and customer- inveigling mystery amid the clamor and 
noise. Whether striding confidently through a town square beside their pack animals or presenting some 
rarity before the throne of a king, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] learned the importance of 
prestige. They were instant celebrities wherever they went, not because of any virtue of their own but 
because of the trade goods and wondrous stories that they carried. It was this "belief" that these ordinary 
retailers actually possessed something to be envied or admired that gave them prestige in the eyes of the 
locals. With high prestige, they could demand higher prices. 

Always a quick student in sizing up a customer, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
realized the reverse psychology of this sales technique. By striking certain noble poses and attitudes 
and by assuming certain authoritative tones of voice, these petty hustlers found that their prestige could 
be raised and their profits increased simply by pretending to be more than they were. It was with this 
insolent audacity, this chutzpah, of pretending to possess what they did not have that the tamkarum 


[merchant-moneylenders] developed Secret Fraud #19: "Prestige is a glittering robe for ennobling treason 
and blinding fools; the more it is used, the more it profits he who dresses in it." 

But mainly, it was the wealthier members of society who benefited from the traders and their 
cargos. Imported goods were more expensive than local manufactures since they were unobtainable 
anywhere else and the cost of importing them added to the amount that the traders would ask. So, the 
average people could not afford them. Since the smaller items often brought the highest prices (such as 
gems and jewels, spices, incense, perfumed oils, artistically crafted gold and silver items), these could be 
safely hidden among the more ordinary goods such as fine linen and wool garments or brass cups and 
copper pots or at the bottom of grain sacks. 

Merchants always had an audience with the kings and ministers simply because of the goods 
that they offered. The more costly and rare items, in addition to their high profit margins, were useful 
as bribes to officials or to tribal leaders or as a means of ingratiating themselves to the kings. The kings 
and their ministers were always eager to buy expensive luxury goods as gifts for favored wives and as 
symbols of personal wealth, status and power. Thus, it was from the palace of kings and ministers that 
the merchants expected their greatest rewards for the small and expensive items. Even better, since the 
import items had cost them very little at their places of origin, these deceiving merchants could bribe the 
kings and ministers cheaply, gaining great business and political influence from grateful administrators 
and generals with expensive gifts that had cost them paltry sums. 

The merchants also brought news and gossip. In the taverns they told amazing stories of foreign 
peoples, tales spiced with awesome adventures and stories of fantastic creatures, ghosts, monsters and 
acts of the gods - all, of course, totally unprovable but since no one could say otherwise, their fabulous 
stories could not be anything other than true. And like any story told for the satisfaction of seeing the 
wide eyes and awe-struck faces of their listeners, the merchants were masters of fabricating whatever 
most pleased themselves and astounded their audience. This is the way of all merchants from the most 
ancient times. Telling stories was a part of the merchants' craft. Like any salesman from every age, 
fanciful stories and droll fibs helped him to sell his goods in the market. Telling stories also added to his 
skills for deceit, that is, knowing just how much could be told so as to be believed, but not saying too 
much so as to lose the sale. 

The merchants told stories to impress the local fools and to elevate their own heroism and 
prestige in the eyes of the local populace. They told stories that advertised the rarity of their costly wares 
and - through giant dust storms, horrible monsters, sheets of lightning, bands of robbers, floods and 
earthquakes - the great difficulty in delivering them to such lucky buyers. Such stories made them greater 
profits without greater expenses. There were stories for demeaning and lowering the price asked for the 
trade goods that the locals wanted to sell. And there were stories proving to the seller that the merchant 
was doing them a favor to buy or trade from them at such low prices because, after all, the poor merchant 
would barely be able to re-sell those goods in distant lands. Such stories and prevarications made for 
them greater profits while costing them nothing more than hot air. Merchants and salesmen have always 
used plenty of hot air and flapping lips to sell their goods because it has "always been this way". 

And there were the stories reserved solely for the king and his councilors, stories that contained 
information about surrounding armies, the personnel of distant courts, the peaceful or war-like 
dispositions of those kings, the logistics and locations of food and water supplies for distant kingdoms 
and the walled cities and the relative wealth of those places. 

No one could judge the relative wealth of a country as well as could a merchant whose greedy 
eyes take in such knowledge at a glance. And no one could penetrate the palaces of distant kings as could 
a merchant whose presence was welcomed and encouraged and who allegedly had only a commercial 
reason for being there. Merchants were not suspected of anything other than the buying and selling of 
goods. Even if they were suspected of spying, it could not be proven. And though the kings could make 


good use of them for gathering intelligence, they could not force them to divulge this intelligence with 
other than politeness and benevolence accompanied by sumptuous banquets and entertainments. So, 
the greedy merchants of the ancient Near East became a favored confidant of many kings. With their 
skills of giving rare presents to court ministers and scribes, with their skills of deceit and bargaining for 
advantage, with their skills of inventing tales of every description, the merchants and moneylenders were 
able to gather from each kingdom more than what the king of that kingdom would have wanted them to 

Some secrets were for the common peasant. Some secrets were only for the ears of kings. Among 
themselves, however, the merchants kept their very own secrets, secrets of how and where to find the best 
deals and to sell for the best prices, secrets that they and their sons and their immediate trade partners 
knew. These were the ordinary secrets that all merchants keep among themselves. But there was more. 
The merchants discovered that in addition to the Sumerian Swindle, they, and only they, knew more 
about distant places than anyone else. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began to realize that 
through their trade networks, they could foresee events and influence politics from over the horizon. 

The majority of the people of 3000 BC rarely traveled more than a day's walk from where they 
were born; and they lived in those confined localities for their entire lives. The majority of the kings of 
the various city states did not travel much either. Their use of donkeys and ox carts and, later, their use of 
horses and chariots allowed them to travel around their kingdoms. But travel of more than a few twenties 
of kilometers for the smaller kingdoms and a hundred kilometers for the larger kingdoms was rare. And 
even in later times when the Sumerian, Assyrian, Egyptian and Persian kings extended their kingdoms 
throughout the Near East, from Mediterranean to Persian Seas, even then, among all of these people 
from lowly servant to highest king, no one knew more about distant lands than did the merchants and 
traders. Traveling, bartering, sightseeing, and profiting from the people around them, was all a part of 
their business. 

No matter how big any of the kingdoms that existed in the ancient world were, the trade routes 
that criss-crossed those kingdoms were far wider and far longer. From the most distant Paleolithic 
times where traders carried obsidian blades and cores along footpaths, up to our modern day world of 
giant container ships and jumbo jets carrying millions of tons of goods, the trade routes have always 
been larger in size that the borders of any country. Thus, the merchants and moneylenders kept a secret 
belief among themselves. That secret belief was this: "Because we tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
have knowledge of distant places that is greater than the kings and far greater than the people, then we 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] are greater than the kings and we are far greater than the people." 

The Kings of Ancient Times 

Kingship arose in Sumerian society as a natural consequence of the needs of a centralized 
government. Even the smallest tribes of people have leaders as chiefs or village headman. It is a natural 
consequence of Mankind to have some who, through charisma or intelligence or wisdom or cunning or 
aggressiveness, become the dominant leaders of their particular group. 

Because the Sumerian society was dependant upon irrigated agriculture, this specialization 
required bureaucratic organization to ensure that the water resources were equally divided among the 
fields and that the irrigation ditches and canals were kept cleared of weeds and debris. In a relatively flat 
and unremarkable landscape, the inevitable disputes over land boundaries required someone to judge 
between arguing neighbors and to resolve these disputes in a fair manner for the sake of peace. And 
in times when the country was under attack from marauding bandits or raiders from the hill tribes, a 
unifying ruler was necessary to act as the central authority and leader of the army. And so, kingship arose 
out of the need of an agricultural society for allocation of water resources and the coordinating of labor 


for work projects and the defensive needs of warfare. 

My use of the word, "king", does not translate well with the Sumerian words describing that office. 
In some cities, he held the title, sanga , or "chief accountant (of the temple)." [ 42 ] This would indicate the 
dual role of his office as both a civil administrator and the controller of the temple businesses. Other 
cities called their king, en, which was a high priestly title. Other cities called the king, ensi, or "city 
governor". And those who were the greatest city governors over several cities were called, lugal , or "great 
man". From these titles, it can been seen that the king was intimately associated with the temples of the 
gods and with the gods, themselves. But at no time in their long history were the kings of Mesopotamia 
believed to be a god. In rare instances, certain kings had made themselves divine in cultic ritual but 
unlike the Egyptian pharaohs, the Mesopotamian kings were men. 

At first, an assembly of elders elected the Sumerian kings to their leadership positions. And they 
held the position as ruler for a limited time. But this system was gradually abandoned quite early in favor 
of a lifetime kingship and later the kingly office became hereditary to the king's sons. 

Regardless of the various peaceful transitions or the violent usurpations throughout their history, 
the kings recognized in themselves and were believed to be by the People as the earthly representatives 
of the gods. It was not a responsibility that they took lightly. Again remember, none of the ancient people 
were atheists. All of them believed in the divine retribution of the gods. An Akkadian proverb provided 
the metaphor: "Man is the shadow of a god, and a slave is the shadow of a man; but the king is the mirror 
of a god." [ 43 ] 

This religious element to kingship must be recognized by the modern Reader if you are to 
understand what was actually a higher form of humanity in those ancient times than what we have in 
the corrupt political processes today. Again, it doesn't matter what you believe; it only matters what the 
ancient peoples believed and what lessons you can learn from them. 

The Mesopotamians believed that kingship was one of the basic elements of civilization and this 
was a gift of the gods to Mankind. Kingship was bestowed by the gods. Unique among all men, the king 
stood at the pinnacle of society and directed society. With such power, it was vitally necessary that the 
king be both strong and wise and that he have the well-being of his people uppermost in his heart and 
mind. As a man who was especially chosen by the gods for this office, the king "took the hand" of the 
gods and sought the guidance of the gods in leading his people. 

Throughout their long history, no matter if the Mesopotamian kings were chosen from among the 
population of the city, or if they were descended from previous kings, or if they were the sons of kings, 
or a king's brother or even if they were merely members of the family of a previous king, they all without 
exception made claims on their legitimacy by claiming that it was the will of the gods that they be king. 

Again remember, dealing with these ancient people, we are dealing with entire societies of highly 
religious people whose every act was an attempt to be worthy servants of the gods. Even the highest 
and most powerful of the kings, demonstrated their subservient nature by submitting to the rituals and 
prophecies of the priests. 

The king was subject to various religious strictures in order to safeguard him against an evil day 
or an evil omen. These omens were interpreted by the priests. What the priests determined as a penance 
to the god is what the king was required to do. On some recorded occasions the king had to fast for 
several days until the new moon appeared; or the king was required to wear the clothes of a nanny and 
remain indoors; or he donned a white robe for several days, or stayed for a week in a reed hut like a sick 
person. [ 44 ] And so, not only was the king under the direct influence of the priests but he was, more 
importantly, under the direct influence of his own devotion to the gods and the realization that his kingly 
office was a gift of the gods and a responsibility to the people. Our modern self-serving politicians should 
take a few hints from their ancient forbearers in this regard. 

Regardless of his political and military power, and no matter how great and personally powerful 


he became, the kings were always guided by the priests and under the influence of the gods. An 
illustration of this is found during Neo-Babylonian times in the New Year's festival celebrated during the 
first eleven days of Nisan, the month of the spring equinox. After the entire Epic of Creation was recited 
in public, the king was permitted to enter the inner sanctuary but only after the high priest had removed 
his royal insignia. The king was humiliated by having his cheek slapped and his ears pulled. Then he knelt 
before Marduk and assured the god that during the year he had not committed any sins or neglected 
Esagila and Babylon. After a speech by the priest, the king's insignia were returned to him, and once 
again he was slapped on the cheek. The more painful his slap, the better, because the tears in the king's 
eyes signified that Marduk was well pleased. [ 45 ] 

The kings may have been powerful but they showed their religious piety by submitting to the 
priests. Even the great Hammurabi of Babylon and Ashurbanipal of Assyria submitted themselves 
to humiliation at the hands of the priests to show their humble devotion to God. Our own modern 
politicians would be less of the treasonous snakes that they are, if they would take a lesson from those 
ancient people. 

Throughout the 3000 year history of Mesopotamian culture, the repeated and recurring theme 
of the kings was that they were chosen by the gods to dispense justice and to promote prosperity among 
the people. And, repeated time and time again over the millennia in clay cuneiform tablets, incised into 
stone monuments, and buried beneath temples as stone memorials, these kings continued to repeat the 
phrases that they were doing the will of the gods as reformers of injustices, to right wrongs, to protect the 
welfare of the people, especially the poor and the weak and the widow and the orphan. The kings were 
protectors of society. 

One question that you should keep in mind as your read these pages is this: If these same phrases 
were used by these hundreds of kings over three thousand years of history, claiming to protect the weak 
from the strong and to protect the poor from the rich and to save the widows and the orphans, then 
from whom was this protection necessary? Three thousand years is a long time to be repeating the same 
phrases in the official documents over and over again, claiming to be defenders against an unnamed 
enemy who never seems to be vanquished but who keeps oppressing the poor and the weak repeatedly 
over the millennia. For three thousand years, the kings of Mesopotamia offered their protection to the 
widows and orphans and to the weak and the poor. So, we know to whom they were offering protection. 
But the question remains, from whom were they defending their people? The kings of Sumeria, Babylonia 
and Assyria told us in their cuneiform archives who they were protecting but they never told us from 
whom their protection was needed because the unnamed enemy "had always been here." The kings could 
see its corrosive results but they were unable to identify its demonic source. 

As the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] bowed at their feet offering delicacies from distant 
lands and rarities from over the horizon, the kings could not see from whom all of the problems of the 
their people arose because the cause "had always been here" pretending to be loyal servants and humble 
advisors. The kings looked to distant enemies and overlooked the treasonous merchants bowing at their 
feet, offering cheap loans and "Oy! Such good deals!" 

The Scribes 

Yes, the Sumerians invented writing. We who are literate might assume that this was a great 
blessing to all of the Mesopotamian people simply because writing is a great blessing to all of us modern 
people. But we would not be entirely correct in our assumption because in Mesopotamia, writing was 
restricted to only a select few. It was not a universal knowledge even among the "Haves" and it was a total 
mystery among the "Have-Nots". 

Education was undertaken only by wealthier families; the poor could not afford the time and cost 


for learning. Administrative documents from 2000 BC list about five hundred scribes who are further 
identified by the names and occupations of their fathers. Their fathers were governors, "city fathers," 
ambassadors, temple administrators, military officers, sea captains, important tax officials, priests, 
managers, accountants, foremen, and scribes, in other words, the wealthier citizens of the city. There are 
references to poor orphan boys adopted and sent to school by generous patrons. But once educated in the 
secrets of the cuneiform script, these poor boys became well-paid scribes. 

There is only one reference to a female scribe. However, cloistered women, celibate devotees of the 
sun god Shamash and his consort Aya, served as scribes for their own cloister administration. Celibate 
priestesses may also have devoted themselves to scholarly pursuits. In fact, school texts have been 
excavated at most private homes in the first half of the second millennium, thereby implying that all boys 
in wealthy families were sent to school. [ 46 ] 

It should be noted, too, that these religious people understood the importance of a celibate 
priesthood. Although many of their priests married and had sons who inherited their father's priestly 
office, only a celibate priesthood can achieve the higher Knowledge of God unfettered by the cares 
and distractions of married life. While all people can have an intimte relationship with the Supreme 
Being, only a celibate priesthood can most easily commune with God to the level of transcendence. 
Unlike modern people who are deluded by the Jewish concepts of Communism, Feminism, Capitalism, 
Humanism, Pornography, and Hedonism, the ancient Sumerians understood religion and kept their high 
priests and priestesses cloistered and celibate. 

It was expensive to send a boy to study in a school known as a "tablet house". And the studies 
were rigorous as well. The cuneiform writing system was composed of over 600 characters that were 
incised upon a wet, clay tablet with a reed stylus. [Figure 2] And most of these characters had multiple 
word and phonetic values. [ 47 ] These complex pictographs with their variety of meanings were difficult 
to memorize. And the school curriculum was very long and hard, more difficult than what a modern 
student could accomplish or be willing to submit to. 

The student attended classes daily from sunrise to sunset. We have no information about 
vacations, but one pupil explained his monthly schedule like this: 

"The reckoning of my monthly stay in the tablet house is (as follows): My days of freedom are 
three per month; its festivals are three days per month. Within it, twenty-four days per month is 
the time of my living in the tablet house. They are long days." 

The student began school between the ages of five and seven years and continued until he became 
a young man. The most complete list of the subjects studied is best represented by a cuneiform tablet 
entitled, "A Failed Examination." The examination involved a comprehensive test by a scribe for his son. It 
took place in the courtyard of the tablet-house before an assembly of masters. The translated tablet reads 
the same today as it did 5000 years ago: 

Father: "Come, my son, sit at my feet. I will talk to you, and you will give me information! From 
your childhood to your adult age you have been staying in the tablet house. Do you know the 
scribal art that you have learned?" 

Son: "What would I not know? Ask me, and I will give you the answer." 

The Father asks a series of questions summated as follows: 

1 . The element of the scribal craft is the simple wedge; it has six directions in which it could be 

written. Do you know its name? 


2. The secret meanings of Sumerian words (cryptography). 

3. Translation from Sumerian to Akkadian and the reverse. 

4. Three Sumerian synonyms for each Akkadian word. 

5. Sumerian grammatical terminology. 

6. Sumerian conjugation of verbs. 

7. Various types of calligraphy and technical writing. 

8. Writing Sumerian phonetically. 

9. To understand the technical language of all classes of priests and other professions, such as 
silversmiths, jewelers, herdsmen and scribes. 

10. How to write, make an envelope, and seal a document. 

1 1 . All kinds of songs and how to conduct a choir. 

12. Mathematics, division of fields, and allotting of rations. 

13. Various musical instruments. 

The candidate failed, and blamed both the master and the big brother for not teaching him these subjects 
but he was duly reprimanded by his Father who said: 

"What have you done, what good came of your sitting here? You are already a ripe man and close 
to being aged! Like an old ass you are not teachable any more. Like withered grain you have 
passed the season. How long will you play around? But, it is still not too late! If you study night 
and day and work all the time modestly and without arrogance, if you listen to your colleagues 
and teachers, you still can become a scribe! The scribal craft, receiving a handsome fee, is a bright- 
eyed guardian, and it is what the palace needs." [ 48 ] 

While the children of the wealthy studied hard in the tablet house to prepare them to be 
professional scribes, the children of the poor farmers and laborers helped their parents in the fields or 
worked in the various industries such as basket weaving, pottery, brick making, fishing, etc. Not all of the 
sons of kings or of the wealthy would go to school to learn to read and write. They were employed as their 
father's assistants or spent their days learning warfare, hunting, administration and business. They, like 
their fathers, relied upon the scribes to write all correspondence and calculate all arithmetic problems. 
With money, they could hire a scribe to do this sort of work so they didn't need to learn it on their own. 
Being both wealthy and illiterate was common and not a matter for concern in those days. Even priests, 
kings, governors, and judges were illiterate, with few exceptions. They had wealth but not education. 

For example, correspondence from Assyrian merchants at Kanesh (Turkey) opens with the 
standard formula: "Tell Mr. A, Mr. B sends the following message." That is, the letter was dictated to one 
professional scribe and would be read to the addressee by another professional scribe. Literacy was highly 
prized, and only a few rulers had attained it, among them Shulgi, Naram-Sin, Lipit-Ishtar, Assurbanipal, 
and Darius, who rightfully boasted of their scribal accomplishments. [ 49 ] As you can see from the above 
school test, becoming a scribe was a difficult educational challenge. 

Thus, within the Sumerian leadership hierarchy of kings and priests, a powerful social level of 
scribes evolved. Whether they had learned their craft and were associated with a temple or whether 
they had studied at one of the private scribal schools, matters little to this discussion because it was their 
special skills that gave them a unique advantage over other men. 

Without doubt, the most important man in the ancient society of Mesopotamia was the 
scribe. Kings might extend their sway over hitherto unknown regions, merchants might organize the 
importation of rare commodities from distant lands, the irrigation officials might set the laborers to 
utilize the bountiful waters of the rivers and to bring fertility to the soil, but without the scribe to record 


and transmit, to pass on the detailed orders of the administrators, to provide the astronomical data 
for controlling the calendar, to calculate the labor force necessary for digging a canal or the supplies 
required by an army, the co-ordination and continuity of all these activities could never have been 
achieved. Ancient Mesopotamian civilization was above all a literate civilization even though literacy was 
concentrated among a specialized few [ 50 ] 

The scribe gained a powerful place for himself in every situation. Economic and administrative 
documents are known from the very beginning of writing in Mesopotamia. Economic documents 
concern a variety of topics such as sales contracts, warranty deeds, marriage settlements, adoption 
contracts, inheritance documents, loan agreements, receipts, court decisions, wage memos, and so 
on. Administrative documents were a bureaucratic tool for recording the movement of goods and 
the responsibility of personnel; taxes, tribute, yields of temple lands, accounts of animals and animal 
products, distribution of goods and rations are among the records kept by officials. [ 51 ] And in all of these 
political and commercial transactions and private letters, the scribe was intimately familiar. 

With such a specialized demand for their services, the students who could graduate as qualified 
scribes found jobs, often in the service of the palace or temple. The goal of the school ("tablet house") was 
to train scribes for the various administrative positions in these institutions as well as in other positions 
such as royal scribe, district scribe, military scribe, land-registrar, scribe for labor groups, administrator, 
public secretary to a high administrative official, accountant, copyist, inscriber of stone and seals, 
ordinary clerk, astrologer, mathematician, or professor of Sumerian. [ 52 ] There was plenty of work for the 
scribes in the ancient Near East. 

Understanding the mathematical skills of the Mesopotamian scribes is important so as to fully 
appreciate their abilities in calculations of any size or any amount of time. They helped build huge 
temples, cities, and canal systems with their math skills, calculated the material requirements for entire 
armies and kept the accounts for international trade and businesses of every kind. During the later 
times of Babylon, they calculated an accurate calendar and the movements of the heavenly bodies and 
so established the basics of modern astronomy. Much of the mathematical knowledge that we take for 
granted today, because it "has always been here", came from the Sumerians and Babylonians. 

I have already described the simple arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle. But to get a better idea 
of the skills and knowledge of these ancient people, momentarily skipping forward in time from the 
Sumerian to the Babylonian period will round out this tour. Just as the modern day swindlers working 
in the stock exchanges and banks use their computers to defraud the entire world, the increasing 
mathematical sophistication of the Mesopotamia scribes allowed the ancient moneylenders to work 
similar swindles during those ancient times. 

The Sumerian and the later Babylonian mathematical methods were basically algebraic. Their 
mathematicians were able to calculate such values of numbers as square roots and cube roots and to 
solve quadratic equations, tables of which have been found. As to their geometrical knowledge, it maybe 
mentioned that the Babylonian mathematicians knew the value of pi very accurately, taking it as 3 and 
1/8. Some cuneiform tablets have been found which deal with the areas of geometrical figures. 

Another of the Babylonian scribal activities related to mathematics was astronomy. The 
Babylonians had two reasons for paying particular attention to the movements of the heavenly bodies. 
One was the need to regulate the calendar so that agricultural operations could be efficiently planned, 
and the other was the theory that events upon earth were either a reflection of, or at least directly related 
to, events in the sky. [ 53 ] 

One of the responsibilities of the King was the regulation of the lunar calendar. Throughout 
Mesopotamian history the calendar was based on a year consisting of twelve lunar months. Since the 
average period from one new moon to the next is twenty-nine and a half days, twelve lunar months 
amount to 354 days, which is eleven and a quarter days short of a solar year. Thus after three years the 


lunar calendar would be thirty-three and three-quarter days out of alignment with the solar year, and 
would need an extra month put in (or "intercalated") to bring it more or less into line. It was the King's 
duty to arrange for this, though of course he did not work it out personally but was advised by his 
astronomers and scribes. [ 54 ] 

Numbers could be used for cryptography. The Mesopotamians assigned a numerical value to 
each sign. Thus, every name had a corresponding numerical value. During construction of his palace 
at Khorsabad, Sargon stated, "I built the circumference of the city wall 16,283 cubits, the number of my 
name." Also, the major gods were assigned numbers according to their position in the divine hierarchy. 
Thus, Arm, the head of the pantheon, was assigned 60 in the numerical hierarchy, Enlil 50, Ea 40, Sin 30, 
Shamash 20, Ishtar 15, and Adad 10. [ 55 ] This form of gematria led to a system of codes and superstitious 
magic among the scribes who used them. It was later taken up by the Jewish rabbis to perpetuate their 
own superstitious frauds. 

With such mathematical skills, it was not difficult for the Mesopotamian moneylenders to figure 
out how to swindle the entire country and its people out of everything. The scribes played a major role in 
this deceit and trickery. After all, they were the employees of the moneylenders and merchants who hired 
them. The scribes did the bidding of those who paid their salaries. Like modern day accountants who 
work for the swindling bankers and financiers, the scribes did as they were told. They wrote the letters, 
conceived the contracts, tallied the property and calculated the profits. But they were the employees of 


In the natural structure of human civilization, after the priests and the king, the merchants and 
moneylenders come next. Logically, they should be discussed here. However, for the structure of this 
history, I shall deal with them last. 

In Mesopotamian society, below the hierarchy of priests-kings-scribes-merchants, there was 
only one other class. This was the farmers and laborers - and below them, the slaves. Until the Industrial 
Revolutions of the 18th centuries AD, all of the civilizations of Mankind have been agricultural societies. 
Food production has always been the prime concern to Mankind no matter whether kings, priests, 
merchants or laborers; after all, without food everybody dies. 

As irrigated agriculture revolutionized the living conditions of Sumerian civilization, the excess 
food that was made available gave these people the leisure time to expand their genius into all of the 
newly discovered areas of a civilized life. The farmers certainly made up the vast majority of the labor 
force. Their methods of farming were labor-intensive and particularly refined to insure successful 
harvests. The crops required both intensive labor and tender care. What care that was provided tended to 
be on the side of excess work rather than allowing for any negligence of labor that would result in a less- 
than-optimum harvest. The merchants and landowners had much to do with these laborious methods as 
they strove for the highest profits. But the specter of starvation gave the greatest incentive to everyone's 

As civilization progressed and the villages turned into towns and then into cities, labor became 
more specialized. Cuneiform lists of occupations tell us how complex society was in those ancient times. 
Carpenters, fishermen, potters, masons, metal-workers, weavers, fullers, gem-cutters, jewelers, painters, 
perfume-makers, beer brewers, farmers, shepherds, stone-masons, laundrymen, goldsmiths, boatmen, 
leather- workers, shoemakers, confectioners, bakers, brewers, oil-pressers, brick makers, basket makers, 
mat makers, blacksmiths, coppersmiths, millers, fowlers, canal-diggers, and sheep shearers were among 
the multitudinous trades that composed Sumerian society. One-fifth of the entire labor population 
consisted of craftsmen busily producing the products of their trade while the remainder was the farmer 


and laboring classes. 

Pay for these craftsmen and laborers was with commodities as well as with silver. Payment in 
rations of grain, wool, clothing, wine, beer or cooking oil was acceptable to them because these were 
things that they could consume, themselves, and any excess above their personal needs they could barter 
for other necessities. A laborer paid in bundles of wool, could barter the wool to farmers or fishermen 
for food. And the cooking oil was a prime source of edible fats in the diet and for use as skin cleanser 
and hair oil besides its trade value. And as you shall see, payment in commodities rather than silver was 
profitable to the employer as a means of keeping wages to the bare minimum. After all, this Sumerian 
civilization that had devolved into a "Have or Have-Not" system (just like in modern times) could not 
exist without the "Haves" getting for themselves the wealth and labor of the "Have-Nots". 

One example of the pay scale found in the cuneiform tablets was a payment that totaled about 
two-and-a-half pints of oil per day for working forty- three days for a perfumer. Not even the worker's 
entire family could eat two-and-a-half pints of oil per day so this was certainly used not just in cooking 
but also in barter. And since workdays were from dawn to dusk, the perfumer certainly got his "money's 
worth" from hiring two men for so little pay. 

In the earliest days, wages in Sumeria were high. But as the Sumerian Swindle worked its evil, 
wages throughout Mesopotamia became increasingly depressed as wealth was ruthlessly monopolized by 
the greedy awilum [Haves]. Furthermore, as the poor became poorer, the natural division of society into 
four classes of priest-king-merchant-farmer became synthetically amalgamated into just the two classes 
of the rich and the poor, the "Haves" and the "Have-Nots". And it was the "Haves" who set the wage scale 
based upon a subsistence minimum that was required to feed a worker and his family just enough to keep 
them alive and working but not based upon a fair wage. Such a reduction in wages was perpetuated by 
cheap immigrant labor being one of the tools of the awilum [Haves] for swindling the muskenum [Have- 
Nots] out of their property. 

In the earliest years of their frauds, the bankers could hide their thievery behind the numerous 
successful awilum [Haves] who still had property and wealth. The few who fell into debt slavery were a 
minority of the population. Thus, the innate evil of lending-for-profit remained hidden from both the 
rich and the impoverished. However, through the astronomically inexorable calculations of interest- 
on-a-loan, especially compound interest, more and more of the population fell into debt and then into 
foreclosure and then into poverty followed by enslavement. As the numbers of these unfortunates grew, 
more and more of the population began to notice the great inequality of wealth in the hands of the 
moneylenders. The Sumerian Swindle began to be noticed for the larceny that it is. And the People began 
to question why it is that the bankers and moneylenders have so much while the People are homeless and 

But from the earliest times while the Ubaidian moneylenders were selling their confiscated farms 
to the newly arriving Sumerians, the Sumerians accepted the system "just as it had always been". They 
did not question why the People were so poor because they were intent upon acquiring the "good deals" 
and the foreclosed lands of the native populace for themselves. Once they had purchased the foreclosed 
properties, as the new land owners, the Sumerians accepted everything that had given them their start - 
including the swindle of lending- at- interest. 

But the new arrivals, themselves, became entrapped from the very first day. By accepting the 
Sumerian Swindle as a legitimate part of Society, they allowed the moneylenders to wrap the tendrils 
of the Swindle around them, too. Inevitably, over time and percentages-on-the-loan, the "Have-Nots" 
among them fell into debt, foreclosure, poverty and slavery. And they, too, began to question the strange 
and puzzling fact that the bankers and moneylenders always obtained the entire wealth of the entire 
nation without working for it. 

As more and more of the People began to reason among themselves and search for an equitable 


solution to the problem, the bankers and moneylenders used Secret Fraud #11 to dispossess those 
people and once again give the lands and the country over to some foreign entity "Dispossessing the 
People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are 

As you shall understand through this study of history as long as the greedy and ruthless private 
moneylenders were allowed to gather the wealth of the People into their own hands, no country could 
exist without becoming involved with betrayal, war, dispossession and finally conquest by foreigners. 
And the cycle was then repeated because it "had always been here." 

With new hosts from whom to suck their blood and without doing any work, the moneylenders 
profited from the work of the new groups of people. They profited through business as the people 
built the country. They profited through the Sumerian Swindle by lending-at-interest and taking for 
themselves what the People had built. And finally, as the People began to wonder why they had so little 
and the moneylenders had so much, the moneylenders would betray the People and make more profits 
by selling the country to foreigners. And again, the cycle was purposely repeated by the moneylenders 
over the millennia. 

The Sumerian wage scales were based upon food rations. "Work for very little or starve" became 
the actual rate of pay. There were no governments that protected worker "rights" because there were no 
rights. The governments were composed of the awilum [the Haves], the priests-kings-merchants-scribes 
who benefited from the labor and wealth produced by the muskenum [Have-Not] workers . Except 
through the urgings of the priests and a few humane and extraordinary kings, there were no official 
sentiments for alleviating the poverty of the muskenum [the Have-Nots] . The "Haves" had what they 
were able to swindle by stealth or to take by force from the "Have-Nots". This was accepted because that 
was how "it had always been". No one then alive could remember it as ever having been any different - 
just like in modern times. 


American Negroes should pay particular attention to this chapter since many of their confusions 
about this issue will be cleared up. However, all people everywhere can benefit from an understanding of 
the origins of slavery. 

Slavery had been a part of the earliest civilizations and it has been a part of Humankind since the 
Stone Age. It was an accepted institution long before the historical record began 5,000 years ago and it 
only came to an end because the white, Christian people of Europe and America brought it to an end. 
White people did not start slavery; it has been a part of all civilizations worldwide, but white people put 
an end to slavery. So, understand this and remember this. It is not inconceivable that slavery had been a 
part of human cultures for a hundred thousand years. But regardless of the length of its history, slavery 
was only ended with the American Civil War of 1861-1865 AD, thanks to white Christians. 

Slavery did not start as a way of capturing people and forcing them to do the hardest and most 
menial work. In the entire history of Mankind on every continent, slavery did not start in this way. It 
started not as men being cruel to other men but, rather, slavery began from men being merciful to other 
men. It began as a way for the defeated to save themselves from death during combat. Since wars were 
fought man-to-man with lots of scuffling and wrestling, it was a natural thing for a loser in battle to beg 
the victor to spare his life or for a victor to offer to spare the loser's life in exchange for lifelong servitude. 

On a small scale, slavery began as a way for a victor to show mercy to the vanquished and for the 
vanquished to show gratitude to the victor. "Spare me!" was the cry of the vanquished. And the cry of the 
victor was, "I will spare your life if you serve me as a helper and as a worker and as a slave. Life for life, 
I will spare your life if you will serve me for life." But as battles between tribes and cities became larger, 


the capture of larger numbers of people became an impersonal capture of human subjects. Slaves became 
property that could be given or sold by the victorious captor. So, slavery arose as a result of warfare. But it 
thrived as a result of money lending. 

Captured people always and at all times had the choice of refusing to become a slave. Of course, 
this meant that they would be killed and maybe tortured first as an incentive for the other captured 
people to accept slavery. So, slavery at first became an accepted part of the first civilizations that arose 
in Mesopotamia because "it has always been here". But it was very much a small-scale and personal 
relationship between slave and master. The Mesopotamian people could conceive of no other way to deal 
with people who they didn't hate enough to kill and who agreed to become a servant-for-life in exchange 
for saving their own lives. 

The first slaves captured by the Sumerians were men or women seized in raids in the mountains. 
This is why the cuneiform characters for "slave" and "slavegirl" were composed of the signs for "man" 
or "woman" plus the sign for "mountain". The slaves worked on road construction, digging and clearing 
canals, as field hands on the farms, laborers in temple construction and military construction, and as 
workers in the palace and temple factories where they were housed in special barracks. Temple slaves 
were drafted from both prisoners of war and the offerings of private citizens. It should be noted that 
pre-classical societies were never economically dependent upon slave labor. But those societies began 
increasingly to use slaves as military conquests brought in more prisoners of war. [ 56 ] The Reader should 
keep this in mind that slavery increased as warfare increased . And warfare increased as the wealth of the 
money lenders increased . 

But there was something unique about Sumerian slavery that you should know. Sometime before 
the beginning of written history (~ 3100 BC), people were becoming enslaved not by being captured in 
war but by being enslaved by the moneylenders as collateral for unpaid debt. 

In the third millennium BC, citizens went into debt slavery because they could not repay loans 
to the merchants. Starving men and women sold themselves or their children into slavery or were seized 
by creditors. Think about this! By 3000 BC it was an accepted custom in this earliest of civilizations for 
people to be enslaved because of grain or silver that they owed to the swindling moneylenders! By the 
eighteenth century BC, debt slavery was so well established that five of Hammurabi's laws regulated 
aspects of it. [ 57 ] 

Keep in mind that slavery was not a part of the earliest Sumerian society any more than it was 
a part of any other society around the world. What relatively few slaves there were had been captured 
in war. But slavery increasingly became a very large part of Sumerian culture as warfare increased and 
through the debt-slavery introduced by the moneylenders' scam known as "compound interest." By 
the time of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon in 1146 BC, slavery was such an accepted part of civilization 
"because it has always been here" that the average household in Babylon had two or three slaves. Some 
wealthy families owned a hundred or more slaves. [ 58 ] Of this total, there were both slaves who had been 
captured by warfare as well as debt slaves. Modern archeologists have been able to calculate through the 
cuneiform records for wool and cloth rations that Nebuchadnezzar, the mighty king, owned about 9000 
slaves. [ 59 ] And none of them were Negroes. 

So, you modern black people who have been deceived by the Jews with the lies that white people 
enslaved your ancestors, you should educate yourselves on the subject. Perhaps reading Louis Farrakhan's 
Nation of Islam book, The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews, will smarten you up and let you 
understand who your real oppressors were. 

And modern people of all races who are groaning under credit card debt or who have lost your 
homes to the bankers, you ought to think about this ancient swindle. Just because the Sumerian Swindle 
has "always been here" does not mean that it should continue to remain among us. 


The Treasonous Class: Merchants and Moneylenders 

At first, Sumerian society followed the example set by the earlier Ubaidians and of most other 
peoples in the world in that they put their gods and their priests at the very top of their social ladder. The 
priests were the natural leaders of society simply because they looked to higher things than are found in 
the domains of mere, mortal Man. And for dealing with the affairs of their small tribes and villages, the 
priests were very often the tribal chiefs as well. 

But the increasing complexity of the agricultural society that was arising in Sumeria, made it 
impossible for the priests to serve the gods and to also lead the worldy affairs of civic administration. 
Dealing with lawsuits and squabbles over water rights and thousands of petty cases of civil disharmony 
were not the subjects upon which priests wish to concentrate their time. Also, the priests practiced long 
periods of fasting, prayer and meditation that required them to remove themselves farther away from the 
ordinary people in order that that they could grow closer to the gods. It was vitally important to know the 
will of the gods. The priests could pass along this intelligence to their people - but only if they were closer 
to their gods and cloistered away from their people. So, for the day-to-day administration of society a 
leader who could concern himself with the ten thousand details on a daily basis, was required. And so, as 
their villages grew into cities and groups of cities and villages grew into city-states, the priests remained 
priests while the village chiefs became kings and governors. 

At first, the new cities that were arising in the fertile plains of Sumeria were dominated both 
socially and economically by the temples. It was the belief of these people that the purpose of Life was to 
serve the gods. And they did so on a daily basis both in their humble homes and in the great temples that 
arose above their mud-brick cities. The temples were not only the center of their religious and social lives 
but, in the beginning, were the center of their economic lives as well. Temples had their own farms and 
factories that produced goods for local consumption and for foreign trade. The people whom the priests 
entrusted to handle these affairs of commerce between cities were the merchants and traders, that is, 
specialists in barter, haggling, profits and logistics. 

As early as 4000 BC, before writing was invented, the temples were the hub of the various 
commercial interests of the desert shepherds, the fishermen and the farmers because they provided a 
centralized location for these groups to meet and to trade. By providing factory and craft facilities for 
potterymaking, cloth weaving and spinning, metalworking, beer brewing and other manufacturing, the 
temples became the center of the entire culture. 

By 3500 BC, in big cities like Uruk, the temple ziggurat was built on a raised platform that 
could be seen for miles around. The temple generated writing, government, a judicial system, fine art, 
architecture, and so on. For the first five hundred years of Sumerian history, the temples alone controlled 
most facets of society and the economy. [ 60 ] The priests were the leaders of society during those times. 
Sumerian society was a god-fearing and moral society. 

Large-scale commercial enterprises were at first the sole responsibility of the temples. They had 
the resources to hire the labor, amass the goods and to sell in wholesale quantities. This was beyond 
the ability of the ordinary local merchant. In addition, any kind of long-distance trade could only 
be accomplished on a large-scale basis since the trade routes and sea-lanes were so dangerous. Even 
though trade routes had been developed for thousands of years throughout the entire ancient Middle 
East, there was little traffic on those routes. Traveling was dangerous due to bad weather, drought, dust 
storms, marauders from the deserts, migrants, runaway slaves, and wild animals such as lions. Only army 
contingents, foreign ambassadors traveling under military protection, royal messengers, and guarded 
donkey caravans, carrying loads from city to city, dared to travel these routes. In fact, there were few 
periods in the history of Mesopotamia when private persons could travel freely and private letters could 
be sent from city to city. [ 61 ] 


Thus, from the earliest times, only those merchants who were employed by the temples or who 
had military escort or who had the wealth to organize guarded caravans, could hope to do any business 
beyond the local level. The merchants and moneylenders arose in an environment where they could 
only operate under the protection of either the kings or the temples. They could only profit while being 
protected by a higher power than what they could muster on their own. And even when they had 
attained great personal wealth and could afford their own small army of caravan guards and body guards, 
they still needed the permission and the trade licenses of the kings to travel across state borders. 

Yes, Mesopotamia had fertile soil and the irrigation water necessary for abundant crops; and yes, 
the country had plenty of sunshine to grow those crops; and yes, it had plenty of dirt and mud to make 
bricks and pottery; and yes, it had reeds with which to make mats and huts, but that is all that it had - 
sun, water, mud and reeds and abundant food. For all other things, the civilizations of Mesopotamia 
vitally needed to engage in trade with other kingdoms. And for gaining the lowest prices and the best 
quality, the crafty and cunning skills of the merchants were necessary. 

As long as the merchants worked for the temples and served the gods, society prospered. As long 
as the merchants and moneylenders had the religious feeling of serving their gods first and foremost, 
society prospered. But once the merchants began to feel the power that came with wealth and once they 
began selfishly to do business for their own personal profits, then Mankind's long history of suffering, 
starvation, disease and warfare began in earnest. Yes, civilization began in Sumeria but hiding behind 
this infant civilization and doing its utmost to drain into their counting houses all of the wealth for 
themselves, was the secretive Treasonous Class, the merchants and money lenders. 

But because these swindlers at first grew in power rather slowly as civilization advanced, their 
deleterious effects on society were not noticed any more than the effects of a tapeworm are noticed by its 
host. Yes, the businessmen and moneylenders helped society to increase in material wealth but only for 
their own benefit, never for any altruistic reasons such as might be expected from the kings or priests. 

Those of you who are observers of modern society in the 21st century AD, can see some 
similarities between what the ancient Sumerians had with what we have today, that is, a society composed 
of the "Haves" and the "Have-Nots". We should not make the same mistake that the Sumerians did in 
believing that this situation is natural even though "it has always been here." We have more experience 
with history than they had. So, why are we continuing to make the same mistakes of civilization that 
they made? Because the Treasonous Class profits from those mistakes and does everything that it can to 
increase their profits by prolonging the sufferings of Mankind, they keep the Sumerian Swindle a secret 
even into our modern times. 

The awilum [Haves] alone had the obligation to pay taxes to the state and to perform military 
duty. And they could bequeath property to their heirs. It is not necessary that they were all super rich 
because, again, wealth is relative. The only necessary requirement for these people to be recognized 
as belonging to this high social group of "freemen" and "gentlemen" was that they were not in debt to 
anyone or in servitude to anyone. They were the "Haves". They had. They owned. They collected payments 
and rents. They bought and sold. They loaned. But they were not in debt. Debt was for the "Have-Nots". 

Muskenum [Have-Nots] is an Amorite term, literally meaning "the one prostrating himself." 
Whenever the muskenum [Have-Nots] appeared in relation to the awilum [the Haves, the "freeman" 
or "citizen"] the status of the muskenum [Have-Nots] was always inferior. The muskenum [Have-Nots] 
often served at the palace in exchange for rations or land allotments. Numerous legal provisions may 
have been necessary in order to identify the muskenum [Have-Nots] with the palace because he was not 
protected by customary law. After 1500 BC the word muskenum [Have-Not] appeared in texts with the 
connotation of "the poor." With this meaning, "muskenum" made its way into Hebrew, Aramaic, and 
Arabic, and much later, into the Romance languages, namely, French (as mesquin) or "petty" and Italian 
(as meschino) or "petty". [ 62 ] 


So, even though the muskenum [Have-Nots] were not slaves, they were servants. And to whom 
were they the servants? To the awilum [the Haves], to whom they paid obeisance and bowed down and 
offered their payments for loans. Perhaps they did not owe money to the awilum [the Haves] but they 
farmed the land of the awilum as tenant farmers. They plied the boats of the awilum as boatmen and 
stevadors. They served in the palace of the awilum . And they were paid for their services with food and 
clothing. This payment in food and clothing kept them alive and clothed but was never enough for them 
to advance themselves into the society of the "Haves". They were the paid servants and the employees of 
the awilum [the Haves] or they repaid their debts by working for free. 

This is why Secret Fraud #5 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "The debtor is the slave of the lender." 
Those of you who have ever sold off some of your valuable and precious possessions in the panic-stricken 
attempt to raise cash to pay credit card and mortgage bills before they accrued late-payment fees, know 
from experience how you have been a slave of the moneylenders. But it was worse in Mesopotamia. 
In those days of 3000 BC, slavery was an ordinary part of life. A poor farmer, fully expecting to make 
a profit and fully confident that he would be able to pay back the loan and the interest, would place as 
guarantee of the loan, his wife or his daughters or sons. But the moneylenders of Sumeria usually charged 
fifty percent interest compounded. So, getting out of debt was extremely difficult. A farmer would have to 
work very hard in the hopes of a bumper crop. Because of the Sumerian Swindle, the moneylenders were 
not only parasites but also slave drivers and brothel owners and pimps. They became the owners of the 
land and even the owners of the very lives and bodies of the people through no other reason other than 
that they were swindlers and frauds. They knew the secret of the Sumerian Swindle and kept it hidden 
from their fellow men. 

Are you seeing any similar pattern in our modern times as the rich get richer and everyone else 
works for them? If so, then in modern times you are observing the Sumerian Swindle in action where the 
rich swindle everything that they have from the poor. And the poor and the middle class accept being 
defrauded because the Sumerian Swindle "has always been here". But in actuality, it has not always been 
here; it is merely older than anyone's memory of when it all began. 

Another such Sumerian Swindle is Secret Fraud #10: "Time benefits the banker and betrays the 
borrower." Over time, every bit of money in society goes to whomever is allowed to charge interest on 
a loan. Through interest fees, there is always less money available than what the banker demands to be 
paid. The banker knows this so how can the banker (who offers the loan with a smile on his face) expect 
to ever be repaid? Neither the bankers today nor the moneylenders of 3000 BC would give a loan to 
anyone without collateral. So, if the money could not be paid back, the moneylender would have a way of 
recuperating his money-plus-interest by seizing the collateral. The average person accepts being swindled 
because it "has always been here." A moneylender seizing property for defaulted loans sounds fair and 
reasonable on the surface simply because most people do not understand the Sumerian Swindle. This 
excuse to steal is all a part of the sham and the fraud of both ancient and modern banking. It is nothing 
but a math trick of demanding more than can possibly exist and then foreclosing on what does exist. 

Just as the bankers of today swindle the farmers out of their lands whether in the Mississippi 
River Valley or the plains of Ontario or the rice patties of Asia, so did the moneylenders of 3000 BC 
swindle the farmers out of the rich loam laid down by the Tigress and Euphrates Rivers. Again simplified, 
here's how this swindle worked in ancient Mesopotamia and how it is still being used to swindle the 
modern farmers today. 

The Sumerian farmer knowing the fertility of his land and knowing how much profit he could 
make with a good crop, wanted to borrow the silver to buy some extra land and seed corn and to hire 
help for the upcoming season. So, he borrowed one shekel of silver from the moneylender at fifty percent 
interest. As collateral, he put up the land that he owned. And a merchant who needed to buy goods to sell 
so that he could travel up the Euphrates to trade in the little river towns there, also needed to borrow one 


shekel of silver from the moneylender. So, he put up as collateral his house and shop. 

And just as the bankers of today swindle the entire world out of our goods and money so too 
did the ancient moneylenders of Mesopotamia keep the secret to themselves and swindle their fellow 
Sumerians out of their land and goods and wealth. Using Secret Fraud #10, they used Time as their 
engineer for profit: "Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower." 

A moneylender or a banker only has to deal with the unfailing numbers of arithmetic. One plus 
one always equals two no matter if the sun is shining brightly or the rains and winds are blowing sheets 
of water across the fields. Fifty percent times two shekels plus the two shekels on loan always equals three 
shekels by arithmetic calculation no matter if the Tigress and Euphrates Rivers dry up and the land is 
parched; or whether the fields flood and wash away all of Creation. The business of the money lender 
and banker is not affected by sun and wind, rain and drought, fire, earthquake, flood, pestilence, locusts, 
blight, disease, or any other act of Nature or act of God that affects other men. The numbers in his ledger 
book are all exactly the same. One plus one always equals two, no matter the weather. One shekel of silver 
lent out at fifty percent interest always returns a shekel and a half at the end of the year. But the numbers 
are false no matter how exact they are . 

Whether the year was one of prosperity or disaster for the people around him, doesn't matter 
to the money lender. For the money lender, the arithmetic never changes. He is immune to change. His 
profits are a mathematical certainty and not a gamble. His profits are based on trickery and deceit as he 
swindles those who trust his honesty. A banker's certainty is not linked to the same fate as the farmer. 
Rains coming early or late can mean a bad crop. Bugs and blight, too much sun or too little, a low river 
from too little snow falling in the distant mountains hundreds of miles away or too much snow melting 
with rains and floods, fire, cattle breaking into the fields and stomping down the crop, wind storms 
leveling the crop and a hundred other natural occurrences can spell disaster for a farmer. And without a 
crop that can be bartered or sold, the farmer has little to live on and nothing to sell. A bad year does not 
usually affect only one farmer but all of the farmers in an entire region or an entire country. So, where 
can they obtain help since all of them are left with little? 

But the moneylender has only the slow turning of the wheel of time and the sure calculations of 
arithmetic with which to contend. He does not gamble. He does not put himself into the hands of Nature 
or of Fate like his fellow men. His is a unique occupation that is insulated from the real world. The world 
of the moneylender is a synthetic one where weather, Nature, and even the Gods cannot change what 
the moneylender creates. And this was what the Sumerian moneylenders began to discover about their 
occupation. They could make a profit not only when times were good but also when times were bad. They 
discovered over five thousand years ago that charging interest on borrowed goods produced a profit. But 
they also discovered something else. They found that they could make even more of a profit when their 
fellow men were destroyed. But this profit was only possible if they could keep for themselves the secret 
of how this destruction came about. 

Secret Fraud #10 of the Sumerian Swindle: "Time benefits the banker and betrays the borrower," 
has ancient roots. But more than farmers are betrayed by this swindle. Anyone whose money flow is 
slowed by bad timing also falls into the moneylenders snare because time on a ledger book is unlimited 
and constant while fate and bad luck will throw all men into the money lender's snare. Calculated time 
marked in a ledger book is regular and predictable. But real time which wears down the fine schemes of 
Man and upsets his nice schedules and careful expectations, works against Man. And so, the farmers and 
petty merchants and ordinary people of Sumeria found that time betrayed them to the moneylenders. 

Indeed, the moneylenders knew that to keep the secret of money-lending to themselves was 
not only a vital means to increase their wealth but also vital to their very lives. If their fellow townsmen 
learned that the money lenders, merchants and bankers were nothing but thieves and swindlers, it would 
not be long before the swindled goods would be confiscated and the swindlers themselves either hung 


or chased out of town. And so, the secret of money lending was never written down and was carefully 
passed along only to sly and reliable sons. The moneylenders' sons had to be sly in order to skillfully 
acquire the criminal methods that their fathers taught them. 

In fact, since lending-at-interest is both a trick and a swindle, it is impossible for the lender to 
be an honest person if he expects to make a profit. So, from its earliest times the moneylenders were 
both tricky and dishonest. They were even more so once arithmetic and writing became a common 
tool because with the use of arithmetic and writing, the moneylenders could calculate larger loans and 
swindle entire countries. And then "prove" that the money was actually owed to them by the fraudulent 
numbers in the ledger book. "Numbers never lie," they would perfidiously tell their impoverished clients. 
But liars who write the numbers, make the numbers lie. 

Religiously, the money lenders were like everyone else in their villages and towns. They believed 
in the gods and performed their duties to those gods through prayer and temple donations. So, it is useful 
here to inquire about the actual religious beliefs of the Mesopotamian people. 

The Gods in Mesopotamia were very much local in nature because they were believed to reside in 
certain cities and in certain places. Each city had its own god as the primary protective deity. There were 
both supreme gods and lesser gods but all of these gods were powerful and worthy of Man's devotion. 
Regardless of the variety of gods, the Mesopotamians had a common belief in a common origination of 
both gods and men. Their creation stories began with an abyss or a void from which the waters of the 
earth and the immensity of the sky were created out of nothing. The two main ways that their religious 
stories brought mankind into Creation was that he was either molded out of clay by a god (the method 
which the Jews stole for their own creation stories) or a god had decreed that men just sprang out of the 
ground like weeds. 

Regardless of which story was accepted as true, the purpose for the creation of Mankind was 
believed by all of the People of Mesopotamia to be for the same reason. Man was created by the gods to 
serve the gods. As servants to the gods, Mankind walked a holy path throughout Life. After all, when 
your every act is as a servant of God, what else can one's life be other than a holy life? What sins there 
were, were mainly sins of omission or trespasses against the gods. Trespasses against the gods were often 
the main topic in Sumerian religious literature. By the end of the second millennium BC, the text "Surpu" 
listed two hundred acts and omissions as sins, including not speaking one's mind, causing discord in the 
family, neglecting a naked person, and killing animals without reason. Can you see the great Humanity 
and religious worthiness of those ancient people? Although the gods punished the sinners they also 
forgave them. But if the gods refused to forgive the sinner, that person could not be helped. [ 63 ] 

The list of sins were based upon service to the gods. But since those early people were still 
inventing Civilization, what they considered to be sins against their fellow man was still in the formative 
stages. So, there was a lot of leeway for sinning against one's fellows since there were so few religious 
constraints to prohibit such. What was practiced as religion in Mesopotamia gave the moneylenders 
the freedom to make full use of their usurious and ruthless proclivities. There was no "hereafter" for the 
Mesopotamians. When they died, they did not look forward to a paradise in heaven or rebirth in another 
life. To them, their grave was their only future and any life in the Underworld was not something to look 
forward to enjoying because in the gloomy underworld there was no joy. This belief gave them all of the 
incentive that they needed to enjoy the life that they had and to make the most of whatever opportunities 
the gods bequeathed. 

The moneylenders followed the same ideas towards their gods as everybody else. As the priests 

"Daily, worship your god 

with offerings, prayers and appropriate incense. 


Bend your heart to your god; 

That befits the office of a personal god, 

prayers, supplication, pressing (the hand to) the nose (as greeting) 

shall you offer up every morning, 

then your power will be great, 

and you will, through the god 

have enormous success." [ 64 ] 

Doing their duty to their god meant offering food and drink to the image and then going 
about their daily business. Thus, the moneylenders could "feel good about themselves" as they offered 
up prayers to their gods in the morning and dragged a farmer and his family off of their land in the 
afternoon. Or if a farmer or petty trader had put up as collateral his wife and daughters or his sons, the 
moneylender had no hesitation about dragging them off to the whorehouses or slave markets after using 
them for his own sexual pleasures first. From the very earliest times, the merchants and moneylenders 
were both slave traders and pimps. And in this capacity, they had a very deleterious affect upon society. 

After all, in a society where there are men who own slaves and prostitutes and who want to profit 
from them, it does not take long before these men are able to reduce large portions of the population into 
a debauched lifestyle. The moneylenders became the foremost slave traders as well as the foremost sex 
fiends in Mesopotamia. Through bondage and slavery, they could realize their every lust. And when their 
lusts were satisfied, they could sell their used up sex slave to someone else or donate her to a temple or 
sell her to a whorehouse. 

By the second millennium BC, the Sumerian goddess Inannna, who was of lesser import in the 
Sumerian pantheon, came to be called Ishtar and the most widely worshipped Babylonian deity. She was 
the goddess of the date storehouse, the goddess of shepherds, the power behind the thundershowers of 
spring and was also the goddess of love and sexuality and patron goddess of the harlot and the alehouse. 
[ 65 ] That Ishtar , the goddess of whore houses and booze halls, became the most widely worshipped deity 
among the Babylonians was because the moneylenders had made her so. 

Over the centuries, as the bankers and moneylenders acquired wealth and slaves, they also 
became the owners of brothels and wine shops. Banking, brothels and booze, all made them ever 
wealthier and increased their influence over the people whom they had debauched. After taking his farm, 
his wife, his children and his self-respect, the moneylenders could still wring a few grains of silver or 
hours of labor out of the drunken farmer who staggered miserably about in the moneylenders' beer halls, 
digging ditches for his beer or doing odd jobs for his bread. 

But there was also the matter of justice. Because the sun god, Shamash, could see everything in 
heaven and on earth with his gleaming eye, then Shamash was naturally the god of justice. And with this 
sun god, all of the world could be brought to justice. So, men who had disputes with anyone could bring 
their disagreements to the town elders or to the king for resolution before the gods. Men who felt cheated 
by the money lenders could ask for justice. But justice seemed best served by those who could afford to 
buy it. This is true in modern times, too, simply because we accept a variety of legal fictions foisted upon 
us because they "have always been here." 

One thing that has always been here, is the injustice of what the money lenders create. The People 
could never, ever get justice from the thieving money lenders. In Sumeria, the god of the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] was not the god of justice, Shamash , the sun god. The god of the money 
lenders was the Moon God, Sin, who began his "day" in the evening, after the sun had gone down. "The 
evening and the morning", is how the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] counted their days, the same 
way the writers of the Old Testament counted their days. 

As the farmers were dispossessed of their lands and the laborers were defrauded of their wives 


and daughters, the Sumerian religion changed in its philosophy. When righteous men fell into poverty 
and families were destroyed even as the wicked moneylenders thrived, the simple piety of the people led 
them to the false conclusion that it was the work of the gods rather than the machinations of evil men. 
The actual cause of their loss and suffering - the Sumerian Swindle, itself - was not recognized for what 
it was because this simple secret was so carefully concealed by the moneylenders. It was their source of 
wealth and power and they were not about to divulge it to anyone other than their trusted sons. 

By the second millennium BC, so many people had been defrauded and enslaved and their 
lives destroyed by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] that the problem of the righteous sufferer 
became part of the Mesopotamian religious consciousness. Two main works, "The Poem of the Righteous 
Sufferer" (what the rabbis plagiarized when they wrote their Book of Job) and "The Babylonian 
Theodicy", considered the workings of divine justice. Both works arrived at the same conclusion: in 
reality, the wicked often fared better than the righteous. [ 66 ] After all, the wicked were the ones who 
loaned money at interest, foreclosed on farms, debauched and pimped daughters and sons, and profited 
from wars. But they had been around longer than anyone could remember, so they were accepted as 
having "always been here". The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were allowed to continue their 
depredations simply because no one could remember any time when society was free of those parasites. 

Monied Class versus Kingly Class 

Both the kings and the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] belonged to the same awilum 
[Haves] social class. While the kings had the responsibility to protect both the People as well as the 
merchant-moneylenders, the merchant-moneylenders' only responsibility was to make a profit from the 
kings and the People. Swindling everybody was their specialty. 

If you look at a map of the ancient trade routes [ Figure 6 ], you will see that this extensive network 
of roads, paths and waterways stretched all across the ancient Middle East and beyond. No matter how 
secluded or how cosmopolitan any of the ancient peoples were, it is an indisputable fact that they knew 
of their distant neighbors over the horizon. What they knew of those neighbors was transmitted to them 
not by the mighty kings but by the traders and merchants who plied the trade routes. 

The trade routes were all very much longer and larger in extent than any of the ancient kingdoms 
ever were. Even in the days of Assyria's greatest expansion, the trade routes that ran through Assyria were 
connected to distant lands and to distant peoples that no Assyrian king had ever seen. But those distant 
lands were visited by the merchants who traveled the trade routes. It was the merchants and traders who 
connected the various countries and the various peoples and not the kings. The kings were guarantors of 
safe-conduct for the merchants within their own kingdoms alone. Although a merchant could travel the 
dangerous trade routes in caravans and with the protection of the king's troops as well as with his own 
hired guards and mercenaries, once he had left the country controlled by a particular king, he would 
have to negotiate protection from the kings and tribal chiefs of the next country that he entered if such 
protection had not already been arranged by the treaties between the kings. 

Being of a protected class was something that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] very 
much cherished. It became a demand wherever they went, a demand to be protected by the king while 
they did their utmost to ravish and swindle the subjects of the king. In their relations with dangerous 
territorial bandit chiefs, the merchants were protected by the threat that if they were harmed or their 
goods stolen, their fellow merchants would never again bring goods to those domains and trade would 
cease. This was an old trick used by even the pre-historic obsidian traders and it was a powerful and 
useful argument. The traders and merchants became a protected class of con-artists and carnival barkers 
who could move their swindles across state lines and national boundaries with the strut and swagger of 
great men even though at heart they were all weasels. 


In those days, the slow and gentle pace of life was only enlivened during some religious feast or 
with a wedding party. Otherwise, the daily round of early rising, working in the fields, fishing, weaving, 
spinning and tending the goats was as it had been for thousands of years without change. So, when 
strangers from a distant land came into town beating drums and blowing bugles and leading pack-asses 
burdened with trade goods, it was a unique event in every community. Farmers and shepherds from 
miles around would flock into town to ogle and trade. The enthusiasm for these events was not lost on 
the wily merchants who knew how to use showmanship to sell their goods and how to leverage every 
profit and every benefit from their protected status as traveling salesmen. 

It was not just for their trade goods that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] found a profit. 
All traveling merchants were good storytellers and were greatly admired for the yarns that they could 
spin about distant lands and strange peoples with tales of monsters and dragons thrown in for added 
amusement. Merchants and traders could get free food and drink and free entertainment wherever they 
went in exchange for travel-tales and marvelous lies. Surrounded by gullible farmers or by mesmerized 
court officials in the taverns and royal residences, with pots of beer and tasty snacks being passed around, 
stories of distant lands and wondrous adventures became immensely improved upon in every town and 
with each re-telling. 

Back at home base, in their secret guild meetings, the merchants regaled one another with the 
stories that had won them so much fame and added profits and free beer in each particular town. Sharing 
trade information and sales techniques with their guild brothers, along with the lies that had won them 
applause from gullible fools brought profits to them all. Their lies about scary monsters and astonishing 
miracles and works of the gods became established facts when the next band of their tamkarum guild 
brothers trumpeted themselves into town, hawking new trade goods and embellishing the same tales to 
the gullible public. Any statement left unchallenged is established as truth. Thus, since the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] were the only ones who traveled to distant places, the people had no other 
choice but to believe the tall tales that the merchants had brought. 

Outrageous tales and prevarications that in no way could ever be disproved became one of the 
fine arts of the traveling tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. These peddlers of foreign merchandise 
became expert liars, knowing that no one but themselves would ever travel to distant lands to verify 
their tales. From ancient times, the merchants and moneylenders realized that they could tell the most 
outrageous stories, and that those stories would be accepted by the People as true just as long as there 
were no other competing tales. Truth was their special enemy. And when different merchants who 
arrived in town at different times, all told the same lies, the the People were thoroughly convinced 
through the connivance of these overtly un-related tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who covertly 
belonged to the same trade guilds. 

Merchants were not only able to profit from their profession as traders but they gained the 
confidence of the various kings in whose territory that they traded because of the information about 
other kings that they could relate. The merchants from the very earliest times became the spies and 
intelligence operatives of every king and tribal chief. And just as the scribes were in a postion to change 
or alter the information that was transmitted through their writing skills, the merchants were able to 
transmit intelligence to the various antagonistic kings depending upon their loyalties and the profits they 
could derive from each. They were the eyes and ears of distant kings. But their loyalty to any particular 
king depended upon the profits that they could best obtain from each. The merchants at a very early time 
became the spies against and the betrayers of entire nations. 

Because of the swindle of money lending and the profits obtained from the monopoly cartels of 
international trade, the moneylenders and merchants were able to amass huge fortunes, fortunes that 
could even rival that of the kings. Once they were able to break free from being the merchant-servants 
of the temples, the moneylenders and merchants were able to rival the wealth of the temples. Because 


moneylending was not recognized as the fraud that it is because it "has always been here" even the kings 
respected the loot that the merchants and moneylenders were able to gain. 

As the moneylenders gained slaves for their sexual pleasures, they became increasingly perverted. 
When Leonard Wooley excavated the Sumerian city of Ur, he found the grave of a moneylender of Ur. 
His private coffin contained one of the richest finds at Ur. A double ax made of electrum, a gold dagger 
with silver sheath hanging from a silver belt, and an amazingly beautiful gold helmet, gold bowls, and a 
gold lamp, each inscribed with his name - Meskalamdug ("hero of the good land"). Outside the coffin 
were two more gold and silver daggers and vessels of gold, silver and electrum. Laid to rest among his 
treasures, this Sumerian money lender was a homosexual pervert and a cross-dresser who was also 
buried with his collection of women's jewelry. 

A recurring theme throughout history can be observed in those ancient days and this same 
theme can be observed in modern days : as the moneylenders and merchants gained wealth and power 
in society, perversions became increasingly commonplace, warfare increased, poverty increased and 
civilizations collapsed. This was entirely because those who controlled the wealth and the property of 
these civilizations, were depraved criminals and lust-filled perverts who brought ruin upon the people 
around them through their limitless greed. In Sumeria, they were known as tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders]. But none of them were Jews because there were no Jews in those ancient days. In modern 
times, these parasites are known as merchants, financiers, and bankers. And today, almost all of them are 

2900-2700 Early Dynastic Period of Akkad 

The Sumerians had about three hundred years of uncontested development in which to create a 
culture that was the greatest ever known up until that time. Their writing, their religion, their customs 
were copied by every country around them. Those Sumerian awilum [Haves] who were ruthless and 
greedy enough, found that the profits from the Sumerian Swindle were much to their liking. Although 
they spread Sumerian Culture to other people, among the moneylenders, the one part of their culture 
that remained their very own secret was the Sumerian Swindle. After all, there was a limited amount of 
silver, so to make themselves rich meant that they would have to make everyone else poor. 

Soon after the Sumerians established their agricultural states in the southern part of 
Mesopotamia, Semites began moving in from Arabia in the West (Amurru) in small numbers. They 
spoke the West Semite dialect from the Amurru (the West) and so are known to us as the Amorites. Some 
of the earliest Sumerian inscriptions contain words derived from Semitic speech. [ 67 ] which indicates that 
they were present at an early time. But their Amorite dialect disappeared as they became absorbed into 
Sumerian culture. 

Because only irrigated agriculture with its associated canals and ditches could produce crops in 
this arid region, no one could live among the Sumerians who did not also participate in the organized 
labor that such agriculture required. Following the long established Secret Fraud #11: "Dispossessing the 
People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are 
impoverished," the Sumerian awilum [the Haves] hired the Amorites as laborers and soldiers. 

This method of swindling their own people out of the land through moneylending and then 
hiring cheap foreign labor to work the foreclosed properties, was very profitable. The Ubaidian 
moneylenders had used it to sell the land to the Sumerians. And now the Sumerian moneylenders used 
the same Swindle to sell Sumerian land to the Amorites. Secret Fraud #11 was profitable but it inevitably 
proved to be a weakening influence for the whole country as the numbers of foreigners increased and as 
the racial characteristics of the Sumerian people became diluted with the Semitic strain. 

But there was no dilution of the gene pool in the north as large numbers of Semites settled 


into the under developed and unpopulated regions of Babylon and Akkad. The methods of irrigated 
agriculture became available to any people who could secure land and work the soil. As the older fields in 
Sumeria had trouble with salt build-up, the Sumerians shifted to more barley production since this grain 
can grow in saltier soil while wheat production shifted to the north into Akkad, the land that would one 
day be known first as Akkadia and then as Assyria. 

As the traveling merchants spread word among the scattered tribes of Semites in the West about 
the richness of crops that could be grown in Sumeria, more Amorites desired those fertile lands. These 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] instructed the Semitic chiefs where the lands were weakly defended 
and, acting as agents for the Sumerian landlords, which lands were for sale to the highest bidder. 
Although the merchants were from the various cities in Sumeria, their allegiance was to their profits and 
not to their people. It was the silver in their purses where their loyalties lay. Continuing with their system 
of betrayal and treason, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] sold the farms and villages that they 
had acquired through their usury swindles to the Semites from Syria. Beginning around 2900 BC, large 
numbers of these Amorites settled into the lands around Babylon, its surrounding towns, and around the 
city of Kish in the region of Akkad. As usual, they adopted the Sumerian culture and lifestyle. 

But the Amorites were not fools. They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy 
the land and the disadvantages to the Sumerian farmers. So, their natural suspicions prompted them to 
ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 
because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Amorites had no reason to hate the Sumerian moneylenders, 
yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new 
immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at 
low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the moneylenders jumped from their old victims who hated 
them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and guides and 
mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around its prey. It's 
bite would come later. 

By 2750 BC, these Semites had had 150 years to increase their population through birth and 
immigration and to fully absorb the Sumerian writing and culture. Just as a modern alphabet can be used 
to write many different languages, so too was the cuneiform characters used by those ancient people to 
write their own language. They retained their own language which is called by the name of the region 
of their greatest power, Akkadian. These Semitic Akkadians, with their high birth-rate and the increase 
from the immigration and settlement of their wandering tribes, became the most dominant people in the 

Up until that time, the southern lands of Sumeria had never been a unified country. It was a 
region that had had many city-states, each of which controlled their own territories. These territories had 
been gradually falling into the hands of the moneylenders and merchants over a period of five hundred 
years as the Sumerian Swindle worked its relentless fraud. By 2500 BC most of the land of Sumeria was 
privately owned while the remainder was owned by the temples and the palace. 

These city states were rather small, so small, in fact, that between many of these city-states, 
from the top of the ziggurat in each city, one could look across the plain to the distant ziggurat of the 
neighboring city-state. The Early Dynastic inscriptions of Sumeria are full of references to battles between 


these squabbling city-states. The Sumerians were a people who insisted upon their individual rights and 
were quick to haul an opponent before a judge in lawsuits concerning the very same issues that modern 
people also find to be worth the fight: disputes over lands, boundaries, inheritance, rents, loans, marriage 
and divorce, and every conceivable argument. And what they argued over between individuals was also 
carried across city boundaries into the bordering city state. 

An example of these squabbles was between the city-states of Lagash and Umma. The city of 
Lagash was set in the middle of a most fertile region crisscrossed with small irrigation canals fed from 
two large canals connecting the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. In antiquity these big canals ensured to 
Lagash not only bountiful crops but also a thriving river-borne trade and in consequence considerable 
material prosperity. Such economic and social stability provided conditions in which a dynasty founded 
there by Ur-Nanshe (~ 2500 BC) was able to rule in unbroken succession for over a century. The city 
of Umma was the residence of the grain god, Shara, so its own agricultural dependence upon the canal 
system was obvious. 

Umma lay to the north of Lagash and was situated on the same two big canals. The direction 
of flow of the canals being from north to south, Umma was in a position to interfere with the water 
supply of Lagash, and this gave rise to conflicts between the two cities on a number of occasions. It is 
the documents recording the circumstances of such events which provide our first substantial historical 
narratives, beginning in the period shortly after 2500 BC. The earliest of these are some inscriptions of 
Eannatum, third ruler of the dynasty of Lagash and grandson of Ur-Nanshe. Notably among these is a 
stone relief set up to mark his defeat of Umma. The monument is known as the Stele of the Vultures from 
the gory details shown of carrion birds fighting over the entrails of the slain after the battle in which 
Eannatum led his city to victory. A little later, a cone-inscription of Entemena, Eannatum's nephew, gives 
a history of the conflict between Umma and Lagash for several generations up to his time. [ 68 ] 

Mainly, the fights between city-states began over land and water. In the treeless and unremarkable 
landscape of Mesopotamia where there was nothing to define boundaries other than dry ditches and 
water- filled canals marked off with boundary stones, the land boundaries and the water rights were often 
in dispute. These arguments between city-states led to fist-fights, village brawls and wars. Wars led to the 
enthrowning and the throwing down of kings. 

In prosperous Lagash, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had become the dominant 
property owners in the state after 500 years of the Sumerian Swindle. Very few free men could claim 
to own their own lands. Most were required under the alternative of starvation to work the foreclosed 
properties owned by the moneylenders. Those who fell victim to the Sumerian Swindle were reduced to 
servitude and slavery. Although the Sumerian Swindle "had always been here", the people accepted its 
legitimacy although they didn't like its result. 

The dispossessed and enslaved people were numerous enough that their voices could be heard. 
In a dissatisfied and rebellious mood, the people demanded a change. Too many proud and free farmers 
had been reduced to slavery along with their wives and children through the moneylenders' swindles. 
Too many daughters and sons had been turned into prostitutes in the moneylender's whore houses and 
as moneylender's sex slaves. Too many old people had been thrown out of their houses to starve and be 
eaten by dogs and wild pigs. The rich were very rich and the poor were not only very poor but were also 
increasing in numbers. 

The poor prayed to their gods and beseeched the temple priests for aid. The priests offered what 
aid they could to the poor but the problems caused by the Sumerian Swindle required both religious 
and political remedies. The priests could not solve the problem alone primarily because the temples also 
practiced the Sumerian Swindle. 

The temples had been practicing the Sumerian Swindle for so long that it was an unquestioned 
fact of life simply because it "had always been here". Because everyone in Sumeria accepted the legitimacy 


of the Sumerian Swindle, its methods were never criticized. Though they tried to help their people, the 
temples did business as usual because such methods for the past 1,000 years "had always been here" 
and because the contracts between the moneylenders and their victims were written on the clay tablets 
and sworn before the gods to be agreeable to all parties. And so Secret #5, "The debtor is the slave of the 
lender", was a mechanism that brought both debt slaves and wealth into the temples of the gods where 
the debt-slaves were cared for. It was the debt-slaves of the perverted and greedy tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] who rallied against their cruel masters. 

At that time, some of the temple lands were rented on a share-cropper basis. A rent equivalent to 
one-third of the crop was paid, one-sixth of it in silver and the rest in kind. With this temple-mandated 
price, even here, where the poor share-cropper had to pay one-third of his crops to the landlord, the 
Secret Fraud #4 of using silver as a part of the payment prolonged the man -years of labor required of the 
share-cropper. The crops alone would give the landlord a profit but when one-sixth of that payment had 
to be made in silver, the share-cropper was put in danger of being victimized with the Sumerian Swindle. 
Under Secret Fraud #4, "Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral." If 
money was tight, that is, if silver was in short supply, even if he could pay all of the rent in crops, he 
would still become enslaved to the moneylenders and landlords if he could not obtain enough silver from 
other sources. Great wealth and great abuses of the power that wealth can buy, became commonplace in 

In this city state of Lagash, the dissatisfaction of the poor was championed by a pious leader 
named Urukagina (2351-2342 BC) who became king with the backing of the temple and the approval 
of the people. Under his pious leadership, the ancient and natural class system of priest-king-merchant- 
worker was re-established among the people of Sumeria who had been reduced to poverty and slavery by 
a thousand years of money lending. No king could become a king in Sumeria without the approval of the 
gods. The gods expressed their approval through the temple and the priests. The laments of the people 
had been heard by the gods, the gods gave their approval to the priests, and the priests passed along this 
approval to Urukagina who "took the hand of the god" in the temple and became king and champion of 
the People. 

Urukagina understood the divine way of life whereby man was created as the servant of the 
gods and not the servant of the moneylenders. He could see with his own eyes the evil effects that the 
moneylenders had on society. He questioned the dictum that just because usury and debt-slavery "had 
always been here," longer than anybody could remember, that it should continue to be here. And he 
listened with compassion to the cries and suffering of the people. 

Although Urukagina was the world's first social reformer, everything that can be discovered about 
his changes in society are found in the cuneiform inscriptions that he left. He decreed that "since time 
immemorial" evil men had been undermining the original "divinely decreed way of life". He wrote that all 
of the leaders of society - priests, administrators, powerful men, and even the ensi ("governor") and their 
extended families - were not serving the people as the just and good servants of God but were acting 
solely for their own benefit. As a true servant of god, Urukagina swore to Ningirsu , the god of rain and 
irrigation and the patron god of Lagash, to bring justice to the land. 

Like every good leader even up to the present day, he could see the effects of the Sumerian 
Swindle but did not identify the cause, itself. He identified the blatant abuses of power but he did not 
recognize the secret workings of the Sumerian Swindle that was the driving force behind much of the 
abuse. He noted such abuses of power as the seizure of property and the enslaving of debtors by temple 
officials and moneylenders, all working in collusion with corrupt judges. He saw that the greed for gain 
had blinded many people from their duties to God. In his inscriptions from 2350 BC, he stated: 

"Since time immemorial, since the seed grain first sprouted forth, the head boatman had the 


boats in charge for his own benefit, the head shepherd had the asses in charge for his own benefit, 
the head shepherd had the sheep in charge for his own benefit; the head fisherman had the fishing 
places in charge for his own benefit. The incantation-priest measured out the barley rent to his 
own advantage.... the [temple] oxen of the gods plowed the gardens of the governor; the gardens 
and the cucumber fields of the governor were in the best fields of the gods; the asses and oxen of 
the priests were taken away by the governor. No barley rations of the priests were administered 
by the men of the governor.... In the garden of a muskenum [Have-Not] a priest could cut a tree 
or carry away its fruit. When a dead man was placed in the tomb, it was necessary to deliver 
in his name seven jars of beer and 420 loaves of bread. The priest received one-half gur [about 
fourteen gallons] of barley, one garment, one turban, and one bed. The priest's assistant received 
one-fourth gur of barley. . . The workingman was forced to beg for his bread; the youth was forced 
to work in the temple factories for free. The houses of the Governor, the fields of the Governor, 
the houses of the Governor's wife, the fields of the Governor's wife, the houses of the Governor's 
children, the fields of the Governor's children - all were joined together side by side. Everywhere 
from border to border there were the priest -judges ....Such were the practices of former days." 

What Urukagina was observing was the blatant destruction of Society by individuals 
through their selfish monopoly over resources. By 2350 BC, the greed of the muskenum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had thoroughly corrupted Sumerian society. The Sumerian Swindle had reduced the 
workers to begging for their rations while the workman's children had been forced to work in the 
factories for free to pay off the debts of their fathers. And above this starvation and poverty stood the 
awilum [the Haves] taking more than they needed and giving less than they should while growing fat 
from the labor and wealth of the poor. To right these wrongs, Urukagina removed corrupt officials. 

He "removed the head boatman in charge of the boats. He removed the head shepherd in charge 
of the asses and sheep. He removed the head fisherman from the fishing places. He removed 
the head of the storehouse from his responsibility of measuring out the barley ration to the 
incantation-priests.... He removed the palace official in charge of collecting the tax from the 
priests. . . .The houses of the Governor and the fields of the Governor were restored to the god 
Ningirsu . The houses of the Governor's wife and the fields of the Governor's wife were restored to 
the goddess Bau. The houses of the Governor's children and the fields of the Governor's children 
were restored to the god Shulshaggana . .. .Everywhere from border to border no one spoke further 
of priest-judges. . .When a dead man was placed in the tomb, (only) three jars of beer and eighty 
loaves of bread were delivered in his name. The priest received one bed and one turban. The 
priest's assistant received one-eighth gur of barley. . .The youth was not required to work in the 
temple factories for free; the workingman was not forced to beg for his bread. The priest no longer 
invaded the garden of a humble person. . . ." 

These priest-judges were a type of con artist who claimed to speak for the gods and to pass 
judgment upon the People based solely upon their alleged holiness and special communications with 
the gods. They would witness "sins" and "transgressions against the gods" and their particular scam was 
to tell their god-fearing victims that the sins could only be extinguished though special sacrifices and 
prayers that the priest-judge would make on their behalf. Of course, the priest -judge treated himself 
to the sacrificed foods and enriched himself with the sacrificed goods. Urukagina did away with their 
frauds. But as you shall see in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, the priest-judges became a favorite 
monopoly and swindle of the Jewish rabbis. 

Urukagina decreed that: 


"If a good ass is born to a muskenum [Have-Not] and his overseer says to him, 'I will buy it from 
you,' then if be wishes to sell it he will say, 'Pay me what pleases me,' but if he does not wish to 
sell, the overseer must not force him. If the house of an awilum [Haves] is next to the house of a 
muskenum [Have-Not] , and if the awilum says to him, 'I wish to buy it,' then if he wishes to sell 
he will say, 'Pay me in silver as much as suits me,' or 'Reimburse me with an equivalent amount of 
barley'. But if he does not wish to sell, the powerful man must not force him." 

After 1000 years of the Sumerian Swindle being used by the moneylenders to betray their people, 
Urukagina freed the Sumerian inhabitants of Lagash from usury, burdensome controls, hunger, theft, 
murder, and seizure of their property and persons. He established freedom. The widow and orphan were 
no longer at the mercy of the rich and powerful. It was for them that Urukagina made his covenant with 
the god, Ningirsu . While Urukagina was reforming the temple, he was rebuilding it as well as the other 
shrines in Lagash. He is the first ruler in recorded history who tried to established freedom and equality 
through reforms in society and in government. 

But these abuses "had always been here" and the awilum [Haves] and tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] who profited from swindling their neighbors and abusing their power also "had always 
been here". They were not about to let a religious reformer take away their material wealth without a fight. 

While good king Urukagina served the gods and the people, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] ruthlessly served themselves with a vengeance fueled by greed. They profited from the 
Sumerian Swindle and the corruption to society that it brought. They did not want good kings and good 
priests ruling over them because they enriched themselves more when the kings and priests were evil 
and corrupt. They benefited immensely from Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle: "High morals 
impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who 
there-by masters them and bends them to his will." Thus, blackmail works when bribes cannot. But the 
moneylenders could not corrupt the virtuous king Urukagina, a man of god. He had the holy priests and 
the people on his side, so the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could not oppose him openly for fear 
of the people. 

In the city-state of Lagash, the temple was the only owner of large properties other than the 
moneylenders and merchants. Without the blessing of the temple priests, Urukagina could not have 
seized power. Obviously, within the priesthood there most certainly were holy men who objected to 
the abuses practiced by their fellow priests. That in his piety and gratitude, Urukagina would bestow 
gifts and wealth upon the temples probably had something to do with such a temple-backed rebellion 
because considerations of finance played a big role in all of the temples of the ancient Near East. These 
temples were great industrial, commercial, agricultural and cattle-raising establishments in addition to 
being the center of religious worship for all of Sumeria. Cynics may say that considerations of "what the 
god wanted" were directly tied to considerations of what was most profitable for the temple, but in fact, 
the temples were also repositories of wisdom and mercy. The priests could see the great hardships that 
were being forced upon the people by the ever- increasing wealth and the ever- increasing power of the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . And they could see that such abuses were not "the straight path" in 
the eyes of God. 

The chief god of Lagash was Ningirsu, both a grain god and a god of war. This god was needed for 
such a city. For centuries, the city-state of Lagash had battled with the Elamites to the southeast and the 
tribes from the mountains to the east. They had had to enforce their boundaries with the Semite cities to 
the north in Akkad. The spirit of Lagash can be seen in its coat-of-arms: a lion-headed eagle with wings 
outspread, grasping a lion in each talon. But regardless of its fierce nature, the fiercest people in Lagash 
were the moneylenders who had been ruthlessly enslaving and disenfranchising their own people since 


the Sumerians had first learned the Sumerian Swindle nearly a thousand years previously 

Urukagina was the first reformer in world history to learn to his woe the wrath of the money 
lenders. As a pious devotee of the gods, his power came from the temple. He was a reformer more than he 
was a military general. His devotion was to his god and to his people. He followed the Mandate of Heaven 
in righting wrongs and protecting the weak. Those people who did not have land, he took the land of the 
moneylenders and returned it to the poor and the disenfranchised. Those people who had been sold into 
bondage by the moneylenders, he freed them and returned children to their parents and wives to their 
husbands. He took away from the money lenders their debt slaves and much of the property that they 
had swindled. And he confiscated much of the lands that they had stolen. He returned all of this to the 
people. And he did all of this with the blessings of the priests and the gods of Lagash. 

In Mesopotamia, every city had its own god. The god of Lagash was not the god of the other cities 
because the people of the entire ancient Near East believed that the gods had their own territories and 
resided in their own personal cities. 

Passing through all of these cities throughout the Near East and across the Mediterranean and 
Persian Seas, throughout the deserts of Arabia, across the waste lands of the far north and the Iranian 
plateau to the east, were the far flung trade routes of the money lenders and merchants. The boundaries 
of the city-states had limits but the boundaries of the moneylenders and merchants were bigger than 
all of the city-states combined. The city-states were local and national in scope. The horizon of the 
moneylenders and merchants was international and stretched far beyond the borders of any state. The 
states were wealthier and more powerful than the moneylenders but the city-states were like a powerful 
insect in the web of a spider. Just as the insect is subdued little by little with entangling threads of silk, 
so too were the city-states subdued as they depended upon the trade routes for their wealth and power. 
These routes were controlled by the merchants and moneylenders. 

So, when Urukagina confiscated the property of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and 
gave it back to the people, he unleashed upon himself an unforeseen wrath by a secretive, cunning and 
cruel gang of swindlers. The secretive guild of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could either be 
good citizens and kindly neighbors to their people and acquiesce to the confiscation and loss of their 
wealth or they could resist. By this time, after nearly a thousand years of wealth gained by subterfuge and 
deceit and ruthlessness, the moneylenders were not about to be good citizens or good neighbors. The 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had never been honest and they had never been good. They had 
always been greedy, acquisitive, avaricious, ruthless, cruel, secretive and murderous. 

Every occupation in Sumeria had its own professional guilds or social clubs that were open 
only to members of each particular craft. It is natural for people to congregate around similar interests. 
A modern day knitting club or coin club or Model-T Ford club is an identical idea to the clubs and 
guilds that have been a part of Mankind since prehistoric times. Within the club, members can share 
information and material resources, talk about areas of mutual interest, and share techniques that benefit 
the group. Such guilds allowed them to sell more efficiently their particular products to outsiders at a 
profit. Guilds of brewers, smiths, and other trades were organized under an administrator, as part of the 
palace or temple organization. [ 70 ] These guilds were not only very ancient social frameworks but many of 
them were very secretive in nature, just as they are today. 

As organized institutions, the guilds not only provided capital for investment but also time and 
freedom from economic pressures for craftsmen to experiment and produce new inventions. Though 
crafts were usually taught orally, cuneiform tablets have been found such as The Farmer's Instructions as 
well as instruction manuals on horse-training, glass making, cooking and beer brewing. The technical 
terminology of the craftsmen were recorded on these tablets along with the caution to "Let the initiate 
show the initiate; the non-initiate shall not see it. It belongs, to the tabooed things of the great gods."[ 71 ] 
Secrecy was an important part of such craftsmen's guilds as glassmaking and leather tanning where secret 


recipes and methods gave these guild members an economic advantage over other guilds in other cities 
and over private individuals. Secrecy was of even greater importance among the guilds of tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] where the methods of the Sumerian Swindle and the cunning skills of the 
merchant gave them an economic advantage over both citizens and kings. 

Merchants had their own guilds of both a general nature as well as specialty guilds for merchants 
who dealt in particular goods such as copper merchants, spice merchants, wool merchants, grain 
merchants, boatmen, brick dealers, etc. Trades were passed from father to son so that family connections 
tended to concentrate members of the same craft into one part of a city. [ 72 ] But the professional 
moneylenders did not have to congregate in any one particular place other than where money was to be 
found, which was everywhere. Unlike brick makers or bakers or boatmen who were tied to places where 
the convenience of transportation and logistics worked in favor of all, the moneylenders could congregate 
wherever they chose. So, they could call their meetings secretly anywhere and locate their guild halls in 
unobtrusive locations. 

Of all the guilds in ancient times up to and including the present day, the most secretive and 
the most difficult to enter was the Guild of the Moneylenders. In the first place, the basic commodity 
that they dealt with was silver and gold which were both very valuable as trade goods as well as easily 
concealed and quickly stolen if not guarded. The mud-brick houses and shops of Mesopotamia could be 
burgled merely by a man digging through the dirt walls with a pick and shovel. So, secrecy and the hiding 
of valuables was very much a part of the moneylenders' methods. 

From the earliest times, they strove to attain Secret Fraud #7 of the Sumerian Swindle, which 
is: "Monopoly gives wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power." 
The moneylenders had learned that if they were to make the biggest profits, then their trade had to be a 
monopoly. It would not be a lucrative business if one moneylender loaned at interest rates of fifty-percent 
while another loaned at rates often-percent. Of course, both interest rates would produce a profit. But 
money lending is not the kind of business where competition increased quality of the product and 
there-by reduced prices to the consumer. Competition between moneylenders tended to chase all of the 
borrowers to the lowest loan rates. And in a competition for customers, lowering rates could only lead 
them all into loaning money for zero interest and thereby returning Society to its natural order. 

So, they formed guilds and from these guilds they created cartels for the control of interest 
rates throughout Mesopotamia. There were moneylender guilds in every city in Mesopotamia, all 
inter-connected as guild brethren, who maintained the same interest rates from city to city. They could 
compete with one another for customers but they did not profit by competing with one another for the 
lowest interest rates. Though the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were all citizens of different city- 
states, they were also secretly in collusion with one another as guild -brethren. 

The money lender guilds were established in every city in the ancient Near East. They were secret 
societies not only because of the swindles that they conspired but also because of the danger of bandits 
and thieves and the tax collectors of the king. Outsiders were just that, outsiders. Whether new members 
were accepted straight away or with a variety of rituals and monetary donations, was determined by the 
particular city's guild. Their personal body guards served the additional tasks of aggressive loan collectors 
and strong-armed goons who could be used for seizing goods and lands and shackling debt-slaves 
as forfeited collateral. The moneylenders did not have to dirty their hands. They could hire plenty of 
gangsters to coerce the debtors from among both the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots] . 

Every trade guild had its own patron deity. The brick maker's god was Kulla . The love goddess 
Inanna (later named Ishtar) was the patron deity of brothels and beer taverns. The patron deity of the 
moneylenders was the Moon God, Sin. This was not a bright god like Shamash, the Sun God, who was 
limited to only half the day. The Moon God lived in both the day and the night sky and was mysterious 
and full of secrets. His "day" began in the evening and he reigned throughout the night, a time when 


debt-slaves were captured and properties confiscated. The Moon God was the god of both the city of Ur 
in Sumeria and the city of Harran in Akkad. Both of these were major guild cities of the moneylenders 
and important cross-road cities for the merchants. Both Ur and Harran were the central terminals of the 
major trade routes. So, they also had located at each, the major temples for Sin , the Moon God, the god of 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . 

Once Urukagina began his social and ethical reforms and returned the swindled properties to 
the People and re-united the enslaved families, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] called upon 
all of the might of their Moon God, Sin, to avenge their losses. They met in secret places with their 
guild brothers to plan strategy. The moneylenders of Lagash realized that their guild brethren from 
cities far outside of the territories of Lagash would see a similar fate occurring to their own wealth if the 
confiscations by Urukagina were not reversed. They all made their profits by swindling the poor and the 
ignorant and they did not want Urukagina's reforms to become popular with the poor and the ignorant 
in other city-states, too. None of them made their money from one city-state alone. All of them were 
intertwined in business and marriage ties all along the trade routes. They understood that by uniting in 
inter-state business guilds, they had a greater influence over kings than did any individual guild within a 

True, the kings and the priests and the people had greater power than the moneylenders and 
merchants. But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began to understand that although they only 
had wealth at their command, that this wealth could buy influence over kings and priests. And these 
kings and priests directly controlled both the people and the state. Wars could be fomented with the 
money used to corrupt kings and debauch the priesthood. Secret Fraud #6 again came into play, "High 
morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender 
who there-by masters them and bends them to his will." 

What's more, this power of money was international and reached far beyond the borders of any 
one state. So again, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were finding that their control of wealth 
gave them control of both kings and people. It was from this time in 2350 BC that Secret Fraud #12 of 
the Sumerian Swindle was developed: "All private individuals who control the public's money supply are 
swindling traitors to both people and country." But treason was not a character flaw new to the tamkarum 
because for them treason was not a flaw, rather, it was a business technique. 

In Secret Fraud #12, the moneylenders and merchants knew how to betray the People and steal 
their property. They knew how to make the People work in the fields and give the moneylenders the fruit 
of their labor. They knew how to make the daughters and sons of the citizens into slaves to serve them 
both menially as servants and sexually as whores. And it was all accomplished with the simple principle 
of lending out two pieces of money and then asking the impossible - that three pieces of money be 
returned. It was in ancient Mesopotamia that all of our modern bankers and financiers got their start in 
betraying the people of the world and destroying Mankind. 

To begin the conspiracy to regain their confiscated wealth, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] did what most traitors of every country do, they approached the worst enemy of Lagash. 
His name was Lugalzagesi, the governor of the city of Umma. 

Umma was only 29 kilometers from Lagash. Over the centuries the two cities had fought many 
times over land and water rights. Umma was a natural choice in allies for the merchant-moneylenders 
because of the ancient animosity between the two cities. Nisaba, the goddess of scribes and grain, had her 
main temple at Umma. The scribes were aligned with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] because 
they offered the scribal guilds the most employment and the richest rewards. The grain merchants of 
Umma were also aligned with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash because they profited 
so much in mutual businesses. None of the awilum [Haves] of Umma wanted to see a general return of 
confiscated property to the rightful owners as had happened in Lagash. All of them wanted to make sure 


that the reforming ideas of Urukagina did not spread to their own dispossessed muskenum [Have-Nots] 
and debt-slaves. So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] from Lagash had plenty of sympathetic 
allies among the trade guilds of Umma and its surrounding towns. The awilum [the Haves] of all of the 
city-states of Sumeria were alarmed by what Urukagina had done for his people. As a unified Treasonous 
Class, the scribes and the greedy awilum [Haves] of Umma aligned themselves with the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash. 

Citing past military defeats and religious differences to Lugalzagesi, the governor of Umma, and 
warning him that the reforming ideas of Urukagina would spread to his own people if something wasn't 
done to stop it, the moneylenders offered their financial backing if a war against Lagash could be waged. 
All they asked for was that their loans be repaid-at-interest from the spoils and that their confiscated 
properties in Lagash be returned to them. The ambitious Lugalzagesi of Umma agreed. With the war 
chest provided, he was able to pay and equip a large army and to defeat Lagash in 2375 BC. 

While Lugalzagesi harangued the people with histories of how Lagash had defeated them in the 
past battles, the priests of Nisaba stirred up the people with lies and prevarications of how Urukagina 
had broken the ancient laws of land ownership, how he had stolen the temple property from the priests, 
how he had stolen the slaves away from their owners, how he had insulted Nisaba, the god of scribes, 
by smashing the legal contracts of the moneylenders and landlords. Even though Urukagina had freed 
the people from debt, the illiterate and ignorant people of Umma were convinced that their leaders were 
telling them the truth because that was "how it had always been". The leaders decreed and the people 
obeyed because in kind-hearted trust, the people believed that their leaders were telling the truth. The 
educated and the wealthy were leaders of the illiterate and the poor. The educated and wealthy sought 
their happiness in wealth rather than righteousness before God, so they betrayed the illiterate and poor. 
The corrupters deceived the innocent. And with the moneylenders' financing, Lugalzagesi hired the 
impoverished laborers from the surrounding countryside and the tribes from the Zagros mountains as 
soldiers in his mercenary army. The rich hired the poor to fight for them in exchange for grain and loot. 
Grain was cheap pay that the poor would eat and then have nothing. The loot was also cheap pay since 
it had cost the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] nothing and they would eventually swindle it away 
from the poor along with their freedoms. 

In Lagash, the reformer Urukagina was a king of the people, not a conquering king intent upon 
empire. In this, the wily moneylenders had read his character well. He was interested in freeing his people 
from oppression and slavery but he was not prepared to fight a war with anyone. As a religious man, he 
did not have the ruthless heart to slaughter the people of Umma who were just as disenfranchised as his 
own people in Lagash had been. He had spent his time as king in rebuilding and refurbishing the temples 
and re-establishing a religious way of life for his people where God was the first consideration and the 
welfare of his people was the first duty of the king just like in the olden days a thousand years before. To 
work so hard to free his people from the slavery of the moneylenders and then to see an army of equally 
enslaved peasants led by the same moneylenders beating at his gates, was too much for him. He did not 
have the heart for battle and offered little resistance. 

After only eight years of Urukagina's rule, the army of Umma led by its governor, Lugalzagesi, 
attacked Lagash, burnt the shrines, and carried off the divine image of Ningirsu . Lugalzagesi burned, 
plundered, and destroyed practically all of the holy places of Lagash. The temples that Urukagina had 
rebuilt and furnished with gold and silver, Lugalzagesi seized and destroyed. It was a rare thing for 
Sumerians to attack the temples even of their enemies. But these holy temples and their priests had 
backed Urukagina and had been behind the uprising against the wealth and criminality of the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] . And so the temples were destroyed and looted so that Lugalzagesi could 
avenge the moneylenders and repay his war loans from the plunder stripped from them. Thus, the 
moneylenders were avenged and their loses were returned to them plus interest from the looting of 



With this looted wealth and the enthusiasm of an army of impoverished peasants and fierce tribal 
mercenaries who were eager for even more loot, Lugalzagesi went on to conquer the Semite city of Kish 
in the north where he killed Ur-Zababa, the king of Kish. This void left in the leadership of Kish was to 
prove to be Lugalzagesi's undoing. But defeating Kish was an important strategy to protect his back for 
his future campaigns and to keep the king of Kish from taking over the lands that were no longer being 
defended by a defeated Lagash. Then, he turned south and conquered the rest of Sumeria, unifying it 
under his kingship and making himself the king of all Sumeria with his capital city at Uruk. 

Uruk (biblical Erech) was the city where the sky-god, Arm, had dwelt, the god of heaven, lord of 
constellations, king of the gods, he who dwelt in the highest heavenly regions. Later, this position was 
absorbed by Enlil, the main god of Uruk. It was believed that Enlil had the power to judge those who 
had committed crimes, and that he had created the stars as soldiers to destroy the wicked. The goddess 
Inanna (Venus or Ishtar) also had her temple in Uruk where the slave girls who had been seized by 
the moneylenders were sold in the brothels or dedicated as the temple prostitutes of Inanna . And so, 
Lugalzagesi felt that such a city, filled with debt-slaves and whores, befitted such a great king as himself. 

With Kish out of the way, and the cities of Sumeria under his rule, he claimed that all foreign 
lands were subservient to him "from the Lower Sea along the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers to the Upper 
Sea," that is from the Persian Gulf to the Mediterranean. Lugalzagesi claimed that he had unified Sumeria 
and controlled the trade routes from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. But these trade routes which 
he claimed to control were the very routes that extended far beyond his territory and beyond his power. 
These routes were traveled by, and best known to, the moneylenders and merchants. He could claim to be 
the king of a large empire, but his claims were based upon his control of Sumeria while the trades routes 
that served Sumeria were serviced by a power that he did not possess and did not understand, the very 
power that had financed his war against the good king Urukagina. 

With Urukagina's reforms smashed, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were free to 
enlarge the limits of their secret and subterranean power. For the first time, these secretive guilds could 
see the great possibilities and profits that could be realized by manipulating the kings and ministers 
while disguising themselves as advisors, financial councilors and subservient moneylenders to kings. By 
working with secret guile, they could create positive and profitable changes in their mutual fate. 

Before the overthrow of Lagash, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had busied themselves 
with business. The buying and selling and slave trading and moneylending had proven very profitable 
to them. But now with their coffers filled with the loot of conquest and their social prestige raised by the 
grateful Lugalzagesi who had proclaimed himself king of Uruk and all of Sumeria, they realized a new 
source of wealth and power for themselves. They began to understand the huge profits that could be 
made from war. 

Lugalzagesi's "empire" did not long endure. The huge profits realized by the moneylenders 
of Sumeria did not go unnoticed by the moneylender guilds of the north. The northern trade routes 
controlled by Sumeria were not tightly held and those that ran through Sumeria were worked by the 
moneylender guilds and the merchants within Sumeria. Lugalzagesi's so-called "empire" was, from the 
very beginning, sapped and undermined by the Treasonous Class. 

After two decades of successful rule over all of Sumeria, Lugalzagesi was defeated in battle and 
brought in a neck stock to the Ekur gate of Nippur to be reviled by all who passed by. He was reviled not 
because he was a loser in battle but because he had robbed and desecrated the temples of Lagash. So, as a 
public humiliation, he was dragged like a dog and tied to the gates of Nippur, the holiest city in Sumeria. 
His conqueror was Sargon of Kish. 

Lugalzagesi's reign (2340-2316 BC) marks the end of the Early Dynastic phase in Sumeria. [ 73 ] 
After this time, the balance of power begins to totter and shift away from the Sumerians and toward the 


Semites of the north whose capital city was Kish and whose moneylenders were a more ruthless variety 
These moneylenders had no fraternal sentiments toward their fellow moneylenders in Sumeria because 
where profits are at stake, blood is thicker than water. 

The Semitic moneylenders of Kish were not Sumerians. Although they had their own 
moneylender guilds which were allied with all of the other moneylender guilds in Sumeria and with 
the rest of the ancient Near East, they had not shared in the looting of Lagash. They had lost much in 
Lugalzagesi's looting of Kish from where their silver and valuables had been carried off to Sumeria. It was 
among the Semites of Kish that Secret Fraud #9 of the Sumerian Swindle was perfected, that is, "Only the 
most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph." Only the most 
ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive because, as time goes by, and the relentlessly increasing sums 
of the Sumerian Swindle multiply, the most ruthless banker must destroy the weaker and feast upon the 

2334 BC. Sargon Gains Control of Sumeria 

The city of Kish has a history that goes back to pre-literate times. Because it was situated away 
from the more densely populated regions of Sumeria, it was settled by the Semites from the Syrian 
desert who entered that less inhabited part of Mesopotamia from the north and west around 2900 BC, 
several hundred years after the Sumerians had arrived in the region. Like all other people who settled in 
the Fertile Crescent, they absorbed the older Sumerian culture and made it their own. They wrote their 
Semitic language with Sumerian cuneiform characters and they worshipped the same gods and followed 
the same cultural patterns that "had always been here." 

Because the Semitic Amorites who settled this region built their culture based upon what the 
Sumerians had already created, nearly everything was Sumerian in origin but with embellishments of a 
Semitic style. While Sumeria continued to be a thriving and prosperous culture to the south, the Semites 
in the area of Babylon and Kish built up their own independent strength and power. 

After Umma's governor, Lugalzagesi, over- threw Urukagina of Uruk and killed king Ur-Zababa of 
Kish, Ur-Zababa's chief minister and cup-bearer took over the kingship of Kish. The cup-bearer's name 
was Sharrum-kin, known to us as Sargon. 

Sargon the Great (2334-2279 BC) was the first of the ancient personages who was given a divine 
beginning which, more than a thousand years later, the Jews plagiarized for their own myths about 
Moses. According to one tradition, Sargon's father was unknown, which meant that he was of humble 
birth. One story, as found in "The Legend of Sargon" written around 2300 BC, gives him a peasant origin: 

"Sargon, the mighty king of Agade, am I. 

My mother was a lowly; my father I knew not. 

The brothers of my father loved the mountain. 

My city is Azupiranu, which is situated on the bank of the Euphrates. 

My lowly mother conceived me, in secret she brought me forth. 

She placed me in a basket of reeds, she closed my entrance with bitumen, 

She cast me upon the river, which did not overflow me. 

The river carried me, it brought me to Akki, the irrigator. 

Akki, the irrigator, in the goodness of his heart lifted me up; 

Akki, the irrigator, as his own son. ...brought me up; 

Akki, the irrigator, as his gardener appointed me. 

When I was a gardener the goddess Ishtar loved me, 

And for four years I ruled the kingdom. ..." [ 74 ] 


Other legends of Sargon claim that he was the illegitimate son of a priestess of Kish. Since the 
king was the chief representative of God, the priests and scribes created the necessary divine link in 
the legend of Sargon. The legend told that Sargon was the son of a high priestess who bore him secretly 
because she was prohibited from having sexual relations with a man. A high priestess was often of royal 
lineage and often the consort of a god. [ 75 ] Although his origins are uncertain, the later histories agree 
that Sargon served as the king's cup bearer. 

The office of Cup Bearer to the King, was an important political station in the hierarchy of ancient 
Near Eastern politics. He who stood by the king and offered him a cup of wine was also an official 
taster to insure that the wine had not been poisoned. In addition, he would act as a casual body guard 
so that others could not approach the king too closely. Such a person would be well acquainted with 
the entire kitchen staff and the logistics of supplies for the palace. Also, being present during all official 
banquets, ceremonies and receptions of foreign dignitaries, the cup bearer of the king was privy to the 
most intimate secrets of kingly office. He could overhear or be invited to participate in discussions and 
entertainments. Such a trusted person would be asked for his advice by the king. 

A cup bearer also met the various merchants who visited the palace. Such an officer of the court 
became educated in the far regions of the surrounding countries and gained an understanding of the 
strengths and weaknesses of each. The wily merchants were always alert for those who could be of use to 
them, weighing their characters and ambitions as carefully as weighing specks of gold. 

Luxury items were important for maintaining the prestige of the royal palaces and the temples. 
Because of the expense and risk involved in obtaining these rare materials, their acquisition remained the 
business of kings and queens, powerful governors, and temple priests. All of them would deal personally 
with the merchants and moneylenders. Money lending and import-export were usually amalgamated 
within the same business families of tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . These merchant-moneylender 
families became intimately familiar with many kings and administrators over many generations. Just as 
they do today, these old scoundrels passed this political and personal information along to their sons so 
that the data base of information about the kings and their families increased and was perpetuated over 
generations of swindlers while what the kings knew of the money lenders remained relatively constant. 

Over the centuries, both raw materials and finished products were imported to Mesopotamia 
from every direction, such as lapis lazuli from Afghanistan, reaching both Mesopotamia and Egypt 
through a complicated network of overland routes. These routes were complicated because over the 
millennia, the various game trails and foot paths through the mountains and deserts were expanded 
both to serve outlying villages and to enable caravans to out-maneuver roving tribes of bandits. Flooding 
rivers, drought through the deserts, and mountain landslides all contributed to re-routing even the oldest 
trails through the wilderness. Commodities arrived by sea from East Africa, the Arabian peninsula, 
Iran, and the Indian subcontinent. [ 76 ] Under such conditions, trade could only occur through carefully 
organized and well-funded organizations. So, an individual merchant had little chance of success against 
the odds of Nature or in competition with the monopolistic trade guilds. 

Although the palaces, temples and kings were the main customers for luxury goods, all of these 
goods without exception passed through the hands of the merchants and moneylenders who each and 
every one were members of the same trade guilds. There were no independent businessmen in those days 
who were not guild members. Thus, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] knew as a corporate entity 
what the private treasures of the palace and temples were as well as the character and depth of greed 
of both royalty and priests. This royal inventory was collected through the generations of merchants 
within their extended family groups and quietly discussed during guild meetings. True, the kings knew 
their own people and something about the surrounding cities and territories. But it was the merchants 
and moneylenders who knew the surrounding territories better than the kings. This scheming group of 


merchants made it their business to know everybody else's business and to profit thereby Through their 
guilds and marriage connections, the business families controlled information and spy networks that 
were larger than that of any individual kingdom. 

By the time of Sargon, these secret and subterranean guilds of moneylenders began to flex their 
power of the purse to control the destiny of peoples. Secret Fraud #7 of the Sumerian Swindle gave them 
an important advantage: "Monopoly gives wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest 
wealth and power." 

With their skills in accounting and numbers, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and their 
scribes could estimate to precise degrees the relative strengths of the various nations and the wealth of 
their kings. In an age where even the kings were illiterate and dependant upon the scribes for writing 
and calculating, the scribes became important sources of information and targets of corruption. Thus, 
what the merchants actually controlled was not just wealth but also information about resources. 
Besides inventories of the palace treasuries, grain field areas gave them close estimates of grain harvests, 
valuable knowledge when weighing the strengths and weaknesses of a kingdom. All of this information 
was known by the scribes. Subverting and bribing the scribes for such data, gave the tamkarum guilds 
military intelligence about the capabilities of every country. But they could only control the destiny of 
nations if they worked secretly and kept their best swindles to themselves. 

To work secretly meant that only verbal orders and agreements could be made between trusted 
sons and guild members. Even though the vast majority of the People were illiterate, that did not prevent 
them from hiring a scribe to read or write their letters and contracts. By using cylinder seals and stamps 
impressed upon wet clay, even the illiterate could mark their possessions and seal their packages, [see 
Figure 7 ] With such a unique stamp, everybody could authenticate a legal document. When pressed into 
the wet clay, both these impressions and the cuneiform writing, could not be altered once the clay had 
hardened. Seals could be rolled on lumps of clay to seal doorways, pottery jars, and packages. Seals could 
be carved on stone, bone, metal, or shell for sale within the budget of every man among the awilum [the 
Haves] . The use of cylinder seals continued throughout Mesopotamian history. 

Although the clay tablets and cylinder seals are superior even to modern paper and computer 
disks in terms of permanence and longevity, they did not have any privacy. Cyphers and secret codes had 
been used for centuries. The secret meaning of words was a standard part of the scribes' schooling. This 
need for secrecy brought about a new invention. Around the time of Sargon (2334-2279 BC), envelopes 
were invented. [ Figure 8 ] These were flattened sheets of clay modeled around the clay tablets. The clay 
envelopes protected the contents from damage and fraud by safeguarding against someone moistening 
the clay and changing the writing. They provided a kind of "notary seal" or a "poor man's copyright" 
that protected the legitimacy of the contents. Sometimes the text was repeated on the envelope so you 
could read what was sealed inside. In the case of a dispute, the envelope would be opened and the 
contents examined and compared. Some envelopes opened in modern times have been found with the 
information written on them different from that of the tablets inside. [ 77 ] So, fraud was not unknown. 

Lugalzagesi had provided the merchants and moneylenders the means of regaining their property 
by over-throwing Urukagina, the reformer king of Lagash. But greed is a demon that is never satisfied 
just as a fire is never satisfied by adding more fuel. The huge quantities of gold and silver that had been 
looted from the temples of Lagash gave the moneylenders new ideas for acquiring even more. This vast 
new source of bullion flowed into their businesses from the soldiers and laborers who had looted this 
wealth during Lugalzagesi's victories. For the sacking of temples as direct participants, the moneylenders 
could plead innocence before the gods. It was though their businesses that they gained all of this loot. 
Silver and gold made available to the people as war booty meant that the people had more silver to buy 
the grain, the garments, the beer, the prostitutes, the slaves and the luxury items that were the stock-in- 
trade of the merchants and moneylenders. War was very profitable to the winners. Profit meant power. 


And the Treasonous Class desired ever more wealth and power without themselves being impious or 
subject to being cursed by the gods. 

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had learned how to inveigle the poor into doing all 
of the stealing. Secret Fraud #20 is "Champion the Minority in order to dispossess the Majority of their 
wealth and power, then swindle the Minority out of that wealth and power." Using this method, it didn't 
matter whether the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] , themselves, took possession of a temple's 
wealth or not. They could avoid the curses of the gods by letting the poor soldiers loot the temples and 
then they could swindle the loot away from the soldiers with the Sumerian Swindle. Taking the gold 
from the gods was a curse, but the gold was not cursed, only the looters who took it were cursed. The 
merchants who took the gold from the looters were innocent. 

However rich the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were, only among the kings and the 
priests were power and prestige found. Mere merchants and moneylenders were forever spat upon and 
hated by the people whom they had swindled. Only among themselves did they have prestige, a prestige 
based upon who among them was the richest. According to Secret Fraud #9 of the Sumerian Swindle, 
among the moneylenders, bankers and merchants, "Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders 
survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph." Thus, the most ruthless and greedy of the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] were also the most prestigious leaders among them. In every gang, it is the 
most criminal who is the boss of the gangsters. 

For the greedy moneylenders of Kish, Lugalzagesi had been a king for too long. His twenty- four 
year reign had allowed him to assemble all of the cities of Sumeria into one, single empire. This was the 
first time that all of Sumeria had been united in over one thousand years. But Lugalzagesi was a Sumerian 
and he was satisfied with being the king of Sumeria. He had been financed by the moneylenders of 
Sumeria to destroy Urukagina of Lagash and to eliminate the Semitic king of Kish before turning south 
and conquering all of Sumeria. He was happy with his victories and was not ambitious for further 

But the merchant-moneylenders of Kish had lost their treasuries to him. They were Semitic 
Amorites, not Sumerians. Although they had absorbed the Sumerian Culture, they were of a different 
race and temperament and language. As merchants and traders, they were adept at seeing the strengths 
and weaknesses in men and of taking advantage of their weaknesses while undermining their strengths. 
They knew of the great wealth their guild brothers in Sumeria had gained through war. They had lost 
much to them. They wanted some of those profits for themselves. And they wanted their treasures 
returned to them. 

The moneylenders found their king in the cup bearer of the former king of Kish. Like most court 
officials, Sharrum-kin had the manners, charisma and air of authority to make a natural leader. He knew 
the subtle ways of politics and court intrigue. He had the drive toward avenging his former master's death 
at the hands of Lugalzagesi. And with the assurance from the moneylender's for their unlimited financial 
support in buying weapons and paying for an army, he had the means of attacking Lugalzagesi at Uruk. 

What's more, he had the information from his tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] informers and 
merchant-spies. Sargon was apprised of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the many cities under 
Lugalzagesi's rule. He knew how many men they had, how rich was their treasuries, how full was their 
granaries, how strong were the walls of the cities and which of the numerous kings would be willing to 
fight against him and which would acquiesce to his rule in exchange for liberality. All of this information 
was compliments of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. Vital information, indeed! Information 
that could only have been supplied by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who did business with all 
of those cities. 

In addition, from the earliest days in pre-literate times, none of the city states of Mesopotamia 
had kept standing armies. Their armies consisted of the ordinary citizens - farmers, fishermen, 


brickmakers, court officials and city governors - assembling whenever there was a threat. Mankind had 
not reached such huge numbers in population that necessitated standing armies as protection against 
other armies in other countries. When threats of war between cities seemed immanent, it was simply 
a matter of sending runners to outlying villages and criers throughout the cities to assemble enough 
farmers and fighters to go to battle. While supplies were drawn in and city gates were shut, the populace 
secured themselves behind their city walls of mud brick. Although this was "how it had always been", this 
ancient Sumerian system was about to change. 

Sargon kept secret his war preparations. With sufficient financing and access to the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] trade routes, he did not need to do business with the Sumerian cities in the 
South for his supplies but could buy directly from the Semitic cities far to the north and west, away 
from the knowledge of Lugalzagesi. Directly to the west of him on the Euphrates was the city of Mari 
which was a major manufacturer of copper and bronze implements and weapons. After all, this was still 
the Bronze Age and such weapons could be bought through the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] 
monopolies at Mari without raising suspicions. Once his army was armed and trained, Sargon struck 
swiftly, attacking Uruk and dragging away Lugalzagesi like a dog in a neck stock to be tied to the gates of 

While Lugalzagesi had fought against each of the Sumerian city states in order to defeat them, 
Sargon used politics to win most of his victories. First, he demonstrated his military might by defeating 
Lugalzagesi at Uruk. He then turned to the other cities of Sumeria. To those kings who refused to 
acquiesce to his rule, he fought against and defeated them in battle. But those kings who agreed to accept 
his rule, he granted them their kingships intact and their cities as their own as long as they paid tribute 
and maintained Sargon's own relatives and trusted friends as resident advisors in the palace. 

Sargon the Great was a brilliant military leader as well as an innovative administrator. Sargon 
was the first king to unite all of Mesopotamia, both the north (Akkad) and the south (Sumer) under 
one ruler. His Akkadian empire became a prototype for later kings. Sargon's policy was to destroy the 
walls of cities within his empire, thus depriving potential rebels of strongholds. He also took members of 
local ruling families to his capital as hostages. If the city governors were willing to shift their allegiance, 
Sargon kept the old administration in office; otherwise, he filled governorships with his own citizens and 
appointed only Semites to high administrative positions. In this way, he encouraged the collapse of the 
old city-state system and moved toward centralized government, backed by reliable garrisons. [ 78 ] Sargon 
installed military garrisons at key positions to manage his vast empire and to ensure the uninterrupted 
flow of tribute. And he was the first king to have a standing army. 

In the scribal records, thirty-four battles are recorded with the victorious Sargon gaining control 
not only of Akkad but of all Sumeria on his way to the Persian Gulf where he washed his weapons in the 
sea in a ritual commemoration of his victories. On the way back, he completed his conquest of southern 
Sumeria. Sargon then turned west and north, traveling along the trade routes of the Euphrates toward 
the Mediterranean where he conquered the lands of Mari, Yarmuti, and Ebla up to the "Cedar Forest" 
(Amanus Mountains) and the "Silver Mountain" (Taurus Mountains). Mention of cedar and silver reveals 
clearly the motivation for this distant campaign. Gaining control of the silver and the building materials 
meant both wealth and power for himself and his economic backers of the Treasonous Class. Returning 
to Kish, he then turned east to conquer Elam and neighboring Barakhshi. [ 79 ] Later legend adds still 
further victories, taking him across the sea as far as Anaku, the "Tin Country" (location uncertain) and 
Kaptara, Old Testament Kaphtor or Crete. 

His victory over two major commercial centers, Mari on the middle Euphrates and Ebla in 
northern Syria, were important because of their strategic position on trade routes. Ebla was the center of 
metal trade in the third millennium BC. [ 80 ] In these decisions can be seen the work of Sargon's advisors. 
Wealth acquisition and trade were paramount. The "silver mountain" mines provided Sargon with the 


wealth to increase State power and to buy influence but most importantly, to balance the false accounting 
books of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. Without an injection of free silver, the debts of the 
king and the People could never be repaid under the cheating Sumerian Swindle. 

By this date in history, silver had become the ultimate commodity with which all other 
commodities could be bought. This shiny metal that was too soft for anything other than making 
trinkets, was useful in its rarity as a type of commodity money. Those who owned the sources of this 
metal could dig it out of the ground at low production costs using war slaves and debt slaves. The silver 
that was obtained for free as war booty or cheaply from slave-labor mines, actually had a higher buying 
power than silver obtained through taxes. Taxes only recycled existing silver and left the problem of the 
phantom and fraudulent moneylender's interest un-payable. However, newly mined silver increased the 
existing total by digging it out of the ground to pay off the phantom interest that the Sumerian Swindle 
had created out of thin air. Theft was the only way for the moneylenders to balance their books because, 
in reality, interest-on-a-loan creates more debt than there is money in existence to repay it. Sargon's 
power was greatly increased by the monopoly over the silver mines that helped to finance his empire. 
And the wealth of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] was increased as the people used their war 
booty to give to the moneylenders as payments for the fraudulent interest-on-a-loan. 

To judge from the much later legends and chronicles, Sargon's conquests continued to range far 
and wide; he may even have sent his armies to Egypt, Ethiopia, and India. To control so vast an empire, 
he stationed military garrisons at various key outposts. Large armies require large taxes and income in 
the form of tribute. In Sumeria, itself, where rebellion was chronic, he appointed fellow Semites to the 
higher administrative posts and garrisoned the cities with all Akkadian troops. For himself and his huge 
court of officials and soldiers, the archives boast that "5400 men ate bread daily before him". 

He built a resplendent capital city of Agade, not far from Kish though its location is still 
unknown. In a brief span of time Agade became the most prosperous and magnificent of the cities of the 
ancient world. Gifts and tribute were brought to it from the four corners of Sargon's realm. At its quays 
ships docked from far-off Dilmun (Bahrain), Magan (Oman), and Melukhkha (the Indus Valley). Most of 
Agade's citizens were no doubt Semites related to Sargon by ties of blood and language, and it is from the 
name Agade, or rather from its Biblical counter-part, Akkad (Genesis 10:10), that the word "Akkadian" 
has come to designate today the Mesopotamian Semites in general. [ 81 ] 

Notice should be taken of the importance of the wharves and quays of Sumerian cities. Water 
transportation was naturally the most efficient way to move men and materials on the Two Rivers and 
through the network of interlinking canals and irrigation channels. Of course, international merchant 
ships from the Persian Gulf moved up river and docked at the wharves. So, their commercial value 
was carefully monitored. Because they were a stop for foreign sailors and traders, the wharves also 
had to function not only as a place of commerce but as a guarded enclave to prevent foreign spies and 
troublesome sailors from infiltrating into the city proper. 

Aside from the walled city with its temples and royal palaces and the suburbs outside of the walls, 
the average Sumerian city also included a special area of wharves. The wharf section functioned not only 
as a docking facility for ships but also as a center of commercial activity. The wharf had administrative 
independence and separate legal status for the citizens transacting business there. Foreign traders had 
stores there, and their needs were met by the sabitum [alewife -moneylender] of the wharf. [ 82 ] These 
women tavern keepers provided the sailors with everything that a sailor would want. So, the problems 
associated with controlling foreign sailors and sea captains were minimized by keeping them restricted 
to the wharf area of the cities. And on the quays and wharves, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
could keep a close eye on their cargos and bargain for newly arrived goods. 

The close cooperation between Sargon and the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] can be 
seen throughout his career. Under his rule international trade flourished between the Mediterranean 


coast and the Persian Gulf. Trade goods from as far away as India could be carried into regions of the 
Mediterranean basin. Even when a local king as far away as Purushkanda in Asia Minor was oppressing 
a Mesopotamian merchant colony Sargon sent a military expedition to protect it. [ 83 ] Rich inducements 
were offered to Sargon by the merchants and he marched with great difficulty to Purushkanda where his 
presence alone brought about a settlement of the merchants' grievances. [ 84 ] 

Sargon the Great appreciated the power of the moneylenders and merchants because they had 
helped him to win his empire. And he understood the importance of trade to the general well-being of 
his administration. Military coercion increased the flow of goods to the imperial center from areas firmly 
under his control. But the private enterprise of the merchants not under Sargon's rule also engaged in 
limited trade [ 85 ] throughout his empire. 

For example, Aratta, a city-state most probably in northwestern Iran near the Caspian Sea, is 
described in Sumerian myths and epics as the rival of Uruk. Aratta was known for its stone, metals, 
craftsmen, and artisans. And, of course, Magan and Melukkha were written about in texts from the 
time of Sargon the Great to the middle of the first millennium BC. Sargon recorded that boats from 
Magan (Oman), Melukkha (Indus valley), and Dilmun (Bahrain) dropped anchor in his capital, Agade. 
Melukkha was described as the place of "black men" and its people as "men of the black land" or 
"black Melukkhaites." "The black land" was described in myths, epics, and economic documents as a 
prosperous, populous country, full of trees, reeds, bulls, birds, various metals, and carnelian. 

There were always foreigners in Mesopotamian cities. The Sumerians and later the Babylonians 
and Assyrians knew about the geography, economy, political organization, religious beliefs, and customs 
of foreign countries and their peoples. From archaeological and literary evidence, the world that the 
Mesopotamians knew about extended north into Anatolia, the Caucasus, and westerly parts of central 
Asia; to the south into Arabia; to the east to India; and to the west to the Mediterranean Sea, Cyprus, 
Crete, and Egypt. [ 86 ] Under Sargon the Great, business prospered and great wealth flowed all across the 
empire. And all of this wealth passed through the hands of the moneylenders and merchants. 

Merely by being the middlemen in any transaction, wealth is siphoned by the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] in handling fees and commissions in addition to profits from sales. And so 
developed Secret Fraud #18 of the Sumerian Swindle: "When the source of goods is distant from the 
customers, profits are increased both by import and export." 

The new supplies of silver, the tribute from conquered territories and taxes gave Sargon the 
spending power to not only enrich the merchants through an increase in trade and luxury goods but to 
buy off the priests and laity. Rebuilding temples were not just acts of piety but were public works where 
the wealth of the empire could be used to employ the People and to increase political support from the 
temple priests. The new wealth of the laborers gave the merchants bigger profits also. This new system of 
centralized government with its bureaucracy of administrators set standards for all future empires in the 
Near East. 

One of Sargon's innovations was the establishment of the office of high priestess to the Moon- 
God at Ur as a royal sinecure, apparently in a deliberate move to ally to his Akkadian administration to 
the loyalty of the 2500 year-old and once powerful Sumerian centers. His daughter Enheduanna was the 
first holder of this celebrated post. For the next 500 years, until the end of the reign of Rim-Sin of Larsa, 
this appointment was a royal prerogative which was exercised through numerous dynastic changes. This 
appointment of the priestess provided Sumeria a unifying link even in periods of apparent disunity. As 
well as being the first, Enheduanna was the most distinguished in this long line of priestesses. There 
survive a number of hymns that she herself, a Semitic Akkadian, is said to have composed - in excellent 
Sumerian! Since the ancients did not usually sign their names to their literary creations, we know 
Enheduanna as history's first known literary figure; even her portrait has survived. [ 87 ] 

But there was another reason that has been overlooked by the archeologists as to why Sargon put 


his daughter into the high office of the Moon God at Ur. As the king of Akkad and Sumeria, he could 
have installed his daughter in any temple that he chose. Why not make her priestess in the greatest 
temple of the highest god in all of Sumeria, the god Enlil in the city of Nippur? Why make her priestess of 
the Moon God at Ur? 

The Moon God was the tutelary deity of the moneylenders of Sumeria. And the city of Ur was the 
main depot of all international trade from the Persian Gulf. Ur is where the sea-going ships off-loaded 
their cargo onto shallow-draft river-going boats. Because the Semitic moneylenders of Akkad had helped 
Sargon to take power, it was important in their control of Sumeria to also control the Moon God's temple 
in Ur. In this way, Sargon had both the temple that the Sumerian moneylenders prayed in as well as the 
main terminal city of the international Persian Gulf trade firmly under the control of both himself and 
his Semitic merchants and moneylenders of Akkad. 

But Sargon had considerable difficulty in controlling his vast empire. Even during his reign, and 
among the cities of Babylonia, there were never-ending rebellions. The "Sargon Chronicle" tells us that 
"in his old age all the countries revolted against him and they besieged him in Agade". Although Sargon 
crushed these insurrections, his sons and grandsons did not inherit a peaceful empire. [ 88 ] 

Sargohs empire lasted just over a century (-2334-2150 BC). Its final collapse was prompted by the 
invasion of a people from the Zagros mountains who disrupted trade and ruined the irrigation system. 
[ 89 ] Although Sargon could defend his empire during his lifetime, his habit of tearing down the walls of 
the cities under his rule made it difficult for his descendants to protect what he had created. He destroyed 
the city walls so he could keep rebellion in check. But once again, the limited vision of the kings were not 
far-ranging enough to see the greater world beyond their domains. With no safe havens, the people of 
the empire were easily attacked by the barbarian hoards from the mountains. The mountains offered safe 
haven and protection to the barbarians but the plains of Mesopotamia offered no protection without city 

It was not just the mountain tribes who were giving Sargohs empire trouble but the cities of 
Sumeria were also in constant agitation and rebellion. A thousand years of Sumerian rule had been upset 
by Sargon. The Sumerians liked things "as they had always been". Even though Sumerian society had its 
share of inequalities with the awilum [the Haves] swindling the lands and lives of the muskenum [Have- 
Nots], at least the People could appeal to the king or to the priests for relief. In Sumeria, over and above 
all were the gods and it was to them that the people owed their ultimate allegiance. 

Yes, Sargon had shown his loyalty to the gods in the traditional way by rebuilding the temples. 
So, the people could see that their taxes and tribute were being used to serve the gods. Yet, it was not the 
way that things "had always been" because the wealth of Sumeria was being siphoned off to the empire of 
Sargon while the people were ruled by Semites from the north - Semitic Amorites who had always been 
regarded by the Sumerians as barbarians, nomads and lowly paid laborers. 

But what was just as bad, Sargon had given the merchants and moneylenders full rights of 
exploitation - full rights of exploitation, that is, if you were a Semite of Kish, an Akkadian. As in ancient 
times, merchants could travel the trade routes through the safe passage guarantees of the king to whom 
taxes were paid. But it was Sargohs Amorite moneylenders who had financed Sargohs empire, not the 
moneylenders of Sumeria. The Sumerian moneylenders and merchants were not given the same access to 
trade routes without a higher tax to the king. This did much to throw the Sumerian merchants behind the 
rebellions that were springing up in Sargohs empire. 

Nowhere were the Sumerian merchants more opposed to Sargon than in the city of Lagash. 
Lagash is where the pious king Urukagina had freed his people from the greed of the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders], so it might seem odd that the merchants of Lagash who had helped to 
overthrown Urukagina would want a return to Sumerian rule, especially since they had been guilty 
of overthrowing Urukagina and installing Lugalzagesi in his stead. But under Sargon, the Amorite 


moneylenders had been given full authority to practice the Sumerian Swindle throughout his empire 
and their preferential treatment had reduced the Sumerian moneylenders' profits. What was worse for 
the Sumerian merchant-moneylenders, Lagash had been one of the main river ports for trade coming 
upriver from the Persian gulf. Once Sargon had built his capital city this trade by-passed Lagash for the 
quays and warehouses of Agade, leaving the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Lagash without a 
wholesale source. 

Sargon lived to be an old man but his son Rimush on his accession found the empire torn by 
revolts and rebellions. The Sumerian people longed for those holy times when the People served the gods 
rather than serving the moneylenders. In bitter battles involving tens of thousands of troops, Rimush 
reconquered the cities of Ur, Umma, Adab, Lagash, Der, and Kazallu, as well as the countries of Elam and 
Barahshi. To be a king meant to also be a warrior. 

A fragment of a vase bearing his name was found at Tell Brak in northeastern Syria and, like his 
father, he claims to have held "for Enlil" the entire country from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf, 
together with all of the mountains. Rimush was killed in a palace conspiracy, assassinated by certain of 
his courtiers, possibly even including his elder brother Manishtushu who succeeded him, and whose 
name, meaning "who is with him", perhaps indicates that they were twins. [ 90 ] Rimush reigned only nine 
years and Manishtushu followed him as king. [ 91 ] 

Manishtushu (2276-2261 BC), like his father Sargon, carried his victorious armies to far-distant 
lands, or at least so it might seem from a passage in one of his inscriptions which reads: "When he 
(Manishtushu) had crossed the Lower Sea (the Persian Gulf) in ships, thirty-two kings gathered against 
him, but he defeated them and smote their cities and prostrated their lords and destroyed the whole 
countryside as far as the silver mines." [ 92 ] Again, the ancient records name the primary goal and chief 
prize of these wars - silver that could be seized rather than paid for, silver that could be mined by the 
debt-slaves and the war-slaves for the cheap pay of a bowl of barley, silver that could be dug out of the 
mountains and given to the moneylenders to pay the interest-on-their-loans to the king, silver to balance 
the phantom interest created by the Sumerian Swindle. 

Manishtushu brought back "black stone" from the mountains beyond the sea, shipping it directly 
to the quays of Agade; this was almost certainly the beautifully grained diorite in which his surviving 
statues are carved in a naturalistic style, striking in its contrast with the stylized conventions of the 
Early Dynastic period. That Manishtushu held Assyria is clear from a votive inscription dedicated to 
him at Assur and from a later text of king Shamshi- Adad who, while restoring the Ishtar temple at 
Nineveh, found a number of statues and stele recording the Akkadian king's founding of that temple. [ 93 ] 
Manishtushu reigned fifteen years and was followed by his son Naram-Sin. 

Naram-Sin was the grandson of Sargon. He controlled an empire from Central Asia Minor to the 
southern end of the Persian Gulf. Ultimately, the empire collapsed under the pressures of the peoples 
from the mountains of the north and east. These people were known as Gutians. This is what most 
archeologists and historians will tell you. But, of course, the story goes much, much deeper than that. 

Beginning around 2200 BC, a great drought descended upon the entire Near East, bringing 
the Old Kingdom of Egypt to an end and seriously weakening Sargon's Empire. Although Egyptian 
civilization collapsed from famine, the weakened empire of Sargon suffered from treason within and 
attack from without. 

In his own inscriptions, Naram-Sin records the military defeat of Mani of Magan (Oman) which 
indicates that he controlled the whole of the western coast of the Persian Gulf at least as far as Oman. 
A poetic composition of some centuries later extols the magnificence of Naram-Sin's times, speaking 
of mighty elephants and apes, beasts from distant lands, abounding in the great square of the capital. 
This suggests trade relations with India. In the north-east, Naram-Sin penetrated into what are now the 
Kurdish hills quelling, at least temporarily, the hill-tribes then known as the Lullu, and setting up a great 


relief carved high in the face of the rock which still exists today, 4000 years later. To guard the route into 
Asia Minor he built a great castle at Tell Brak, and it is likely that there was another such garrison at 
Nineveh. A stele of his has been found as far north as Diarbekr on the borders of Armenia. [ 94 ] 

All of this reflects the great wealth and power of Naram-Sin and the entire dynasty of his 
grandfather, Sargon. And where there is great wealth, there are the moneylenders and merchants seeking 
to acquire as much as possible of it for themselves. These parasites can make a profit both in times of 
peace and in times of war. But it was during times of war that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
found their greatest and fastest opportunities for profits. 

The moneylender guilds transcended political and geographic boundaries because silver, when 
used as a type of money, transcended those same boundaries. But please note that silver was not a true 
money. As you will see in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon, true money would be an invention of 
the Greeks. Silver was a commodity money of barter which was traded in weighed amounts for other 
commodities. And so, it was controlled like any other commodity, by those who could manipulate its 

By the time of Sargon's Dynasty, the People of all cities and lands in Mesopotamia were entrapped 
by both the Akkadian and the Sumerian moneylenders whose ruthless practice of the Sumerian Swindle 
continued under Sargon who owed them so much. However, because the Akkadians of Kish now 
controlled the trade routes of Sargon's empire, they were in an advantageous position to control prices for 
goods sold to the Sumerian merchants. 

Thus, being out maneuvered and under-cut, the merchants of Sumeria could only sell for the 
higher prices that reflected the higher taxes to the king and the higher wholesale prices that they had 
to pay to the Akkadian wholesalers. This led to a lot of dissatisfaction among the Sumerian merchants 
since their wealth declined. And because they "had always been" a part of the Sumerian community, they 
expressed their dissatisfaction through sedition. 

In every city, the merchants "have always been" in a strategic position in every market place 
and in every shop to foment rebellion among the ordinary people. The merchants were the middlemen 
between farmer, palace and temple. So, they could spread dissention to all classes. As awilum [the Haves], 
they had the ear of the upper classes. Among themselves, the merchants could gripe about lower profits 
and discuss ways to improve their lot. But they could not say the same things to the rest of the People 
because no one would have any sympathy at all for a moneylender or a merchant who charged the 
highest prices that he could get while still complaining about not making more. So, the dissatisfaction 
of the merchants was always couched in arguments aimed at spreading rebellion without exposing their 
own self-interest. Just as in modern times, hypocrisy was a basic technique of the swindling and vicious 
moneylenders and merchants because that is "how it has always been". 

Such hypocrisy and deceit worked well among the illiterate muskenum [Have-Nots] who were 
told about how much more they had to pay for something to eat because of the increased tribute to 
Sargon and his sons. The Sumerian moneylenders were just as ravenous as the Akkadian moneylenders 
of Sargon's empire and they practiced the Sumerian Swindle to its fullest profit. But as merchants who 
had personal contact with the People everyday, they could plead poverty with conviction. They could 
blame the Akkadians of the north for the increased prices because the complaint was true. 

Thus, Sargon found constantly rebellious cities throughout his empire and all of his sons fared 
no better. They could win an empire but to hold it required constant police action, crowd control and 
warfare. Constant warfare raised prices which added to the profits of both the Akkadian and Sumerian 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] because only the merchants and moneylenders belonged to a 
guild that was devoted solely to buying and selling all things and lending- at- interest grain and silver. All 
profits increased during times of war. So, the merchants and moneylenders found their greatest profits by 
promoting rebellion. 


Naram-Sin's own inscriptions mention a general rebellion of the principal cities of Sumeria and 
Akkad, including Kish, Uruk and Sippar. While the tradition mentions that the goddess Innin decided 
to abandon the capital, Agade, the immediate cause of the withdrawal of divine favor is now known. A 
Sumerian text, put together from a number of fragments in various museums, describes in the opening 
lines the early splendour and wealth of Agade, to which people came from all quarters of the world 
bearing their tribute. The impious deed of Naram-Sin brought this to an end, for he had allowed his 
troops to desecrate, sack and loot the Ekur, the great temple of the highest god Enlil in the holiest of 
Sumerian cities, Nippur. 

The Sumerian city of Nippur was a part of Sargon's conquests in creating the Akkadian empire. 
But the carefully laid plans of the moneylenders' dream of gaining wealth and protection under Sargon 
was overturned by the Sumerian priests. The religions of Sumeria all without exception were based upon 
the belief that Mankind was created to serve the gods. Once Sargon and his sons and grandsons gained 
the kingship of Sumer and replaced the Sumerian governors and kings with their own men; once the 
taxes and tribute and labor of the Sumerian people began to be siphoned off toward the construction and 
embellishment of Sargon's capital city of Agade rather than being used toward a pious and prosperous 
life of the Sumerian people; and once Sargon allowed the Sumerian Swindle to again ravage the People 
through his Akkadian moneylenders, the priests declared the displeasure of the god, Enlil , and so 
promoted rebellion. After the rebellion was quashed, when Naram-Sin again took control of Nippur, he 
punished the priests of the Ekur temple by allowing his troops to loot it. 

The importance of Nippur is reflected even today in the great size of its mud-brick ziggurat 
mound of Enlil's temple located between Baghdad and Basra in southern Iraq. Nippur was one of the 
longest-lived Sumerian sites, beginning in the prehistoric Ubaid period (5000 BC) and lasting until about 
800 AD in the Islamic era. 

From earliest recorded times, Nippur was a sacred city, not a political capital. It was this holy 
character which allowed Nippur to survive numerous wars and the fall of dynasties that brought 
destruction to other cities. Although not a capital city, Nippur had an important role to play in politics. 
Kings, on ascending the throne in cities such as Kish, Ur, and Isin, sought recognition at Ekur, the temple 
of Enlil, the chief god of the Mesopotamian pantheon. In exchange for such legitimization, the kings 
lavished gifts of land, precious metals and stone, and other commodities on the temples and on the city 
as a whole. At the end of successful wars, rulers would present booty, including captives, to Enlil and 
the other gods at Nippur. In an effort to win the blessings of the gods and priests and people of Nippur, 
kings carried out expensive construction and restoration of the temples, public administrative buildings, 
fortification walls, and canals. 

The literary tradition that later attached itself so strongly to Sargon and Naram-Sin saw them not 
only as two of the most illustrious figures in the ancient world but also as rulers whose disastrous final 
years implied some stigma of ill-fate. 

Sargon, following the usual public relations promotion of rebuilding Sumerian temples, had 
provided all of the cities of Sumeria, including Nippur's Ekur temple, with renovation work and treasures 
for the god. All of his sons followed in this ancient Sumerian tradition. But during the Akkadian reign, 
Nippur was among the rebellious cities who chaffed at Semitic rule. The priests of Nippur were not so 
foolish as to believe that the gifts of Sargon had been anything but a bribe to the gods offered by a foreign 
king. The Sumerian People wanted to be free of the Semites and the rapacious moneylenders who stood 
behind the throne. The priests of Nippur wanted to serve the gods and protect their people. And the 
moneylenders and merchants of Sumeria wanted the wealth that was being siphoned away from them by 
the Dynasty of Sargon. So, together the priests and the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
put their wealth and prestige behind whatever anti-Akkadian alliances arose. 

We know from contemporary inscriptions that Naram-Sin had refurbished the Ekur temple and 


dedicated statues there celebrating his victories. So, like his grandfather, Sargon, he had given the temple 
even more wealth. But when rebellion broke out Naram-Sin did not forget his grandfather's generosity 
or his own gifts toward what appeared to him as an ungrateful temple of priests at Nippur. And knowing 
from his spies that the Sumerian moneylenders were involved in these rebellions and tribal uprisings, 
he decided to take the silver and gold that was helping to finance those revolutions. Naram-Sin sacked 
Nippur as well as the Ekur temple. His ships docked at the quay by the temple in order to load and 
carry off the loot to Agade. Once again, the moneylenders and merchants had lost their wealth to the 
confiscations of a king. 

Pillaging a temple was not something that was usually done in Sumeria since the armies on 
both sides feared all of the gods equally. Very few individuals would dare to risk the curse of a god for 
doing so. Sargon respected this and his humility before the gods can be seen in his kingly titles, which 
were comparatively modest and reflected little more than the titulary used by the Early Dynastic kings. 
But under his grandson, Naram-Sin, a change took place so startling that it proved in the long run 
unacceptable. Naram-Sin could dare to pillage Nippur's temples because he considered himself a mighty 
king who was as strong as a god. Naram-Sin adopted a naming style that was previously the exclusive 
prerogative of the gods. On his own inscriptions his name appears preceded by the determinative for 
"divinity", that is, the cuneiform sign "god" normally written before the name of a god. The language in 
texts dedicated to him was even less reserved, and in these his servants address him not merely as divine 
but literally as "god of Agade". 

This divine form of name was adopted by Naram-Sin's son, Shar-kali-sharri, and the later 
kings of Ur and Isin. Although there is evidence to suggest a widespread cult of the divine king under 
the succeeding dynasty at Ur, the principle of a divine kingship was never wholeheartedly adopted in 
Mesopotamia. Certainly, the deified Mesopotamian king was in no way comparable with the divine and 
absolute Pharaoh in Egypt. Even divine Mesopotamian kings, along with their people, remained at all 
times subject to the will of the gods. [ 95 ] 

Sargon and his sons, Rimush and Manishtushu, and his grandson Naram-Sin were adept 
at smothering rebellion. The uncoordinated uprisings scattered around the Akkadian Empire were 
efficiently suppressed. Remember, Sargon had torn down the walls of the Sumerian cities precisely 
as a preventative to such rebellion. Without safe refuge and with Akkadian troops stationed in all 
cities, rebellion was difficult. And the king was supported in all of his actions by his own Amorite 
moneylenders, priests and merchants. 

But the Sumerian moneylenders not only wanted their confiscated wealth back but they wanted 
the fruits of empire as well. Since the Sumerian people, who had Akkadian troops stationed around their 
various cities, could not raise an army strong enough to defeat the Akkadians, the moneylenders and city 
governors devised a plan to induce the wild tribes of the mountains to attack the Akkadians. Far up in the 
mountains, away from the prying eyes of Akkadian spies, through gifts, bribes, supply of bronze weapons 
and promises of future wealth, the moneylenders hired an army of wild tribesmen to attack Akkad on 
many fronts. 

This would be a recurring technique throughout history, Secret Fraud #15 of the Sumerian 
Swindle, "Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons." By making loans to friends at low 
interest rates and easy terms, the moneylenders gained the goodwill and cooperation of people who 
acquiesce to becoming their friends and buying their goods. The profits are low but the power is great. 
By making loans to enemies, regardless of the loan rates, the moneylenders give enemies strength. In 
this case, the Sumerian moneylenders gave gifts as well as loans of silver, grain and weapons to the 
Gutian tribes and encouraged them to attack and loot the cities of Akkad. To hide the Sumerian sources 
of Gutian financial backing, the moneylenders blamed the god, Enlil, for bringing the attacks upon the 


According to the priests at Nippur, it was their furious god, Enlil, who brought down from the 
hills upon the fertile land the barbarous race of Gutians. These savages disrupted communications and 
trade, upset and ruined the irrigation system, which always required careful, constant and centralized 
control, and produced famine and death throughout the land. To turn aside Enlil's wrath from Sumeria 
and Akkad as a whole, eight of the senior gods undertook that Agade should itself be destroyed in 
reprisal for the violation of Nippur. 

It has been plausibly argued that, in fact, the Gutians were neither the sole nor the deciding factor 
in the downfall of the Agade dynasty. There is no indication in the Akkadian inscriptions that the Gutians 
were recognized as a menace sufficiently serious to disrupt this situation, and this can hardly be due to 
deliberate suppression of the truth, since conflict with rebellious city-states is freely mentioned. [ 96 ] But 
the Akkadian inscriptions could only recognize overt threats of actual rebellions, not covert threats of 
secret alliances and subversive activity. Because the Sumerians did not have walled cities as strongholds 
and with Sargon and his sons stationing troops throughout Sumeria, it was not possible for the Sumerian 
people to free themselves from foreign domination without outside help. This help came from secret 
alliances with the mountain tribes of Gutia. And these alliances could only have been arranged by the 
merchants and the envoys of the Sumerian leaders who traveled in disguise with the merchant caravans. 
Rebellion is not something that occurs overnight but requires years of planning if it is to be successful. 
Secrecy requires patience. And the Sumerian moneylenders understood both secrecy and patience as well 
as the horrible penalty of discovery. 

As a theme of vengeful gods that would be repeated in the Hebrew plagiarisms of the Old 
Testament, the Sumerian priests wrote that Enlil, enraged by the sacrilege of his pillaged temple, turned 
to the Gutians to effect revenge. Blaming the gods for earthquakes or wars, made the god even more 
awesome to the People. In the later Babylonian version of this certainly apocryphal story, Babylon and 
Marduk are defiled, but both versions ascribe to the Gutians the role of divine avenger. The priests wrote 
a vivid description of the ideal city, Agade, its buildings full of gold, silver, copper, tin and lapis lazuli, 
its citizens wise and joyful. In an explanation of the troubles, the priests were quick to point out that 
Naram-Sin had brought ill-fate to the empire because of his sacrilegious actions toward the Ekur temple. 
The cause-and-effect associated with the gods versus the fate of Mankind was piously accepted by all of 
the people's of the ancient Near East. When "the good sense of Agade turned to folly", a chilling account 
of the ensuing destruction follows. Communications were cut; brigands dwelt on the roads; irrigation 
systems were disrupted - always a disastrous consequence of unstable conditions - and dire famine came 
upon the land. 

According to the cuneiform tablets, with the increasing rebellions within the cities and the 
increasing attacks from the mountain tribes, Naram-Sin's son, Shar-kali-sharri, appears to have tried 
to undo some of the mischief wrought by his father. Several of his dedicatory inscriptions in which he 
describes himself as "the builder of the Ekur, the house of Enlil," show his panic-stricken piety as he 
attempted to appease the god for Naram-Sin's looting and transgressions. 

But appeasing the angry god did not help in the least to appease the conniving moneylenders and 
merchants of Lagash, Nippur and all of Sumeria. 

With famine and desolation rampant, so the tablets continue, eight of the major Gods decide that for the 
good of Mankind, Enlil 's rage must be assuaged. They vow to Enlil the total destruction of Agade and 
pronounce upon that city a lengthy curse: 

"May your groves be heaped up like dust.... 

May your clay [bricks] return to the depths of the earth.... 

May your palace built with joyful heart be turned into a depressing ruin.... 

Over the place where your rites and rituals were conducted may the fox 


who haunts the ruined mounds glide his tail... 

May no human being walk because of snakes, vermin and scorpions...." 

And, concludes the poet-historian who wrote of the fall of the Akkadian Empire, such indeed was 
the case. Thereafter, Agade remained desolate and uninhabited. [ 97 ] The site of Agade remains unidentified 
today though it is almost certainly to be found in the vicinity of Kish or Babylon. Indeed it is possible that 
the city was situated somewhere within the later city boundaries of Babylon itself or even buried today in 
the ancient dust beneath streets and buildings of modern Baghdad. No one knows. 

The Third Dynasty of Ur and Ur-Nammu, 2250-2120 BC 

The dynasty founded by Sargon the Great, though it endured for little more than a century, left a 
permanent imprint on Mesopotamian history. Sargon's administrative skills proved that many cities could 
be consolidated into a single empire, all with the central administrative city of Agade at its core. 

Sargon's empire, which had been financed by the Semitic moneylenders of Kish, flourished 
through its monopoly of the trade routes and its control of the silver mines. With silver as the 
international medium of exchange, political power and material goods could be purchased across 
international boundaries with the cheap silver that Sargon's empire dug out of the Taurus Mountains. A 
shekel of silver that could buy a large quantity of grain, gained in its buying power when it was seized 
for free as war booty or mined from the Silver Mountains by debt-slaves for next to nothing. Circulation 
of all of that free silver from mining, war booty, tribute, taxes and loot, allowed the People to pay their 
debts with real metal, real metal that the phantom numbers of the tamkarum account books claimed 
as interest. With their Sumerian Swindle paid off and with balanced account books, the Sumerian 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were ready to increase their investments. 

With a larger empire, the moneylenders and merchants realized the enormous wealth that could 
be swindled more efficiently from larger numbers of people when the volume of business increased 
through international trade and taxes. The government could be sustained with taxes, war booty and 
tribute while the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could be enriched with a monopoly over a larger 
market and by swindling the war booty away from the soldiers. 

Unlike modern times, the moneylenders did not have an international interlocking monopoly 
over all finances in every country like they do today. In 2200 BC, civilization was still young. The 
moneylenders still worked in extended family groups, in clans, in city-wide cartels and in city-states 
where the guilds of several cities controlled prices. 

The Semitic moneylenders of Akkad were not Sumerians. They did not share their profits with 
the Sumerians over whom they ruled. Any Empire-wide monopoly was controlled by the Akkadian 
merchant-moneylenders, leaving the Sumerian tamkarum out of the profit stream through the principles 
of Secret Fraud #9, "Only the most ruthless and greedy moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt 
bankers triumph." For this reason, the Sumerian moneylenders wanted the Akkadian moneylenders over- 

But Sargon and his sons had posted garrisons of troops in every city. Sumeria was occupied by 
the Akkadian military. So, the Sumerian moneylenders brokered a deal with the Gutians from the Zagros 
Mountains to rid Sumeria of Akkadian domination. It was not an altruistic kind of help because it was 
not the Akkadian Dynasty of Sargon that they wanted to get rid of, rather, it was the Akkadian merchant- 
moneylenders who were cutting into their profits that worried them the most. They were Sumerian 
merchant-moneylenders who wanted to continue sucking the blood of their fellow Sumerians. They did 
not want the Akkadians to do it and leave them without a profit. 

Armed with the best weapons and fed with Sumerian grain, the Gutian tribes rushed out of the 


Zagros Mountains and attacked Akkad on a broad front. As Sargon's empire fell, the brunt of the Gutian 
attacks were directed against his grandson's capital at Agade and the other cities of Akkad. Since the war 
material, food and financing for the Gutian tribes came from the Sumerian moneylenders of Lagash, 
Nippur and other cities of Sumeria, the attacks avoided those cities and were directed at the center of 
Akkadian might to the north of Sumeria, that is, the cities of Agade, Kish, Babylon and surrounding 

However, controlling wild barbarians once unleashed has never been a simple matter. Although 
the Gutians' allies were the Sumerians, some of the northern Sumerian cities inevitably suffered from the 
Gutian attacks. Since their defensive city walls had been torn down by Sargon, they were easy pickings. 
Yet, whether they were allies or not, the Gutians were like the 800 pound gorilla invited to dinner - 
friendly as long as he is fed but not at all easy to un-invite. 

The defeat of Sargon's grand-son, Naram-Sin, at the hands of the Gutians brought political 
confusion and anarchy as the Sumerians threw off the foreign domination and began to re-establish their 
society "just as it had always been," that is, devoted to serving the gods and living the peaceful life of 
agrarian society under Sumerian governors speaking the Sumerian language. 

Although "just as it has always been" was a good slogan for attracting the common people to fight 
in the battle, it also meant that the Sumerian moneylenders could practice the Sumerian Swindle "just as 
it had always been." The Twenty-One Secret Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle had been fully operational 
during the Akkadian occupation. So, the People were glad to be offered a relief from the mounting debts 
and confiscations of the Semitic moneylenders of Akkad. The Gutian destruction of the Akkadian Empire 
canceled all debts and tribute that the Sumerians had paid to their Semitic overlords. As the empire of 
Sargon and Naram-Sin fell, the Akkadian temples were plundered and neither women nor children were 
spared. The Akkadian moneylenders who had placed their trust in the protection of the gods by putting 
their silver on deposit in the temples lost everything. 

While the impact of the Gutians was felt most severely in Akkad, in Sumeria only a few of the 
old city-states suffered some material damage in the first wave of barbarian invasion. However, all of the 
Sumerian cities and, most importantly, the wealth of the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
remained virtually autonomous. The Gutians knew who their friends and benefactors were. Even though 
the Sumerian cities had no defensive walls, they spared both the Sumerian cities and the wealth of their 
"friends" the Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 

Even though it was geographically close to the battles over Kish and Agade, one of the cities 
which suffered the least was Lagash. This city had been rebuilt during the prosperous days of the Agade 
dynasty, and immediately regained much of its old importance as a river-port. Once the Akkadians were 
defeated and the Gutian troubles had subsided, Lagash was now able to recover much of its past splendor. 
Lagash once again controlled the Tigress River trade from Melukkha (India), Magan (Oman), and 
Dilmun (Bahrain). 

Even though they did not have an army at their command, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] of Sumeria were able to destroy the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Akkad. Their 
use of outside military might was ingenious. Without actually leading or controlling the Gutian hoards 
but merely through financing them, they were able to have their enemies destroyed and the Sumerian 
lands of their ancestry unencumbered. But they still did not have a free hand in swindling the people 
because it was the priests of the temples and the governors and kings living in the city palaces who 
actually managed society, not the moneylenders. And both kings and priests served the god and thereby 
saved the people. So, the kings and priests were a constant impediment to the unrestrained, voracious 
greed of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 

Although the Gutian rulers were the dominant political element throughout the seven or eight 
decades following the death of Naram-Sin; they were ignorant and illiterate tribesmen who ruled 


through military domination. The Gutians were too primitive to understand the Sumerian Swindle 
and were perfectly happy with taxes and tribute alone. They were illiterate tribal barbarians who were 
unfamiliar with the complexities of civilization. They did not have the knowledge or skills to control 
large populations or to operate complex societies. Besides, their homes were in the mountains. They 
had conquered the Akkadians for the loot, not for the land. For actually administering the cities and 
controlling the canals and the grain growing operations and businesses, the Gutians, content with tribute, 
appointed Sumerian governors. 

A list of twenty-one so-called kings of the Gutian period is given in the Sumerian King List, but 
in view of their extremely short reigns (only one exceeded seven years and about half of them were three 
years or less) it seems likely that they were chiefs appointed for a limited term of office. Later tradition 
emphasized the barbarity of the Gutians, and if their social organization was primitive, it is likely that 
kingship as a developed and permanent institution had not yet arisen among them. Some of the later 
names in the list of Gutian rulers are Semitic, which indicates that assimilation of the barbarians was 
taking place. A few dedication inscriptions show that, as was the custom of people living among resident 
gods, that they had adopted the religious cults of the land. The Gutian period, which may be taken as 
beginning at about 2250 BC, during the reign of Naram-Sin's son, was certainly at an end by 2120 BC. 
In later days, the civilized peoples of Babylonia remembered the period of Gutian domination with 
abhorrence, as a time of barbarism. [ 98 ] But it was also a time of profits for the Sumerian tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] . 

The Gutians favored Lagash since their richest Sumerian allies lived there and because of its 
Tigress River traffic and trade advantages bringing supplies close to the overland routes into their Zagros 
homeland. Lagash became the dominant city in southern Sumeria, controlling at times Ur, Umma, and 
Uruk As their strength returned under the leadership of the governors of Lagash, the Sumerian people 
began to throw off, but not to completely eliminate, the Gutian barbarians. 

The founder of the new Lagash dynasty of governors was Ur-Bau, who has left several dedicatory 
inscriptions recording his reconstruction of numerous temples in Lagash. He was also in control of 
Ur. He was influential enough to have his daughter installed as high priestess of the Moon God, Ur's 
tutelary deity. Note once again the importance that a king placed on having his daughter installed as 
high priestess of the guild deity of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . As governor, he controlled 
through his daughter, both the guild city of Ur and the temple of the Moon God where the moneylenders 
worshipped. Ur-Bau had three sons-in-law, Gudea, Urgar, and Namhani, each of whom became governor 
of Lagash. ["] Gudea was the best-known of these. 

Gudea's authority extended well beyond Lagash - he claimed to be suzerain to Nippur and Uruk 
and even undertook a campaign to loot the Elamite city of Anshan. But according to his inscriptions he 
was principally concerned with religion and in the building or restoration of temples and the fulfillment 
of his duties to the gods.[ 100 ] The ancient ways as they "have always been" had returned to Sumeria. 
The kings, priests and people served the gods with piety and happiness. And "just as it had always 
been", the Treasonous Class of merchants and moneylenders served themselves with usury, fraud and 
deceit without the Akkadian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] siphoning away their profits. The 
moneylenders were happy to have gotten rid of their Akkadian competitors but under the Sumerian 
governors of Lagash, the reforms of Urukagina had once again been instituted to limit their ruthless 
application of the Sumerian Swindle. Once again, the kings and priests were standing between the 
moneylenders and their victims, the People. 

Gudea's peaceful face, reflecting his blissful piety, have become familiar to the modern student 
from the numerous statues of him that have been recovered. Some of these carry long inscriptions 
recording his religious activities in connection with the building and rebuilding of Lagash's more 
important temples. From them we learn that, in spite of Gutian domination, Gudea had trade contacts 


with practically the entire "civilized" world of those days. He obtained gold from Anatolia and Egypt, 
silver from the Taurus range, cedars from the Amanus, copper from the Zagros, diorite from Egypt, 
carnelian from Ethiopia, and timber from Dilmun (Bahrain). Nor did he seem to find any difficulty in 
obtaining craftsmen from Susa and Elam for the decoration of his temples. [ 101 ] 

"Cedar beams from the Cedar-mountain (Lebanon) 

He had landed on the quayside ... ; 

Gudea had ... bitumen and gypsum 

Brought in ... ships from the hills of Madga (Kirkuk).... 

Gold dust was brought to the city- ruler from the Gold-land (Armenia).... 

Shining precious metal came to Gudea from abroad, 

Bright carnelian came from Melukha (the Indus valley)." [ 102 ] 

And all of this was purchased with grain from the fertile soil of Sumeria, from manufactured 
trade goods and from taxes. Regardless of the Gutian victories over the Akkadians, the Sumerian People 
demanded that their leaders fulfill their promises to make Sumeria like "it had always been". Both the 
Sumerian leaders and the Sumerian people believed that the Akkadian domination of them had been a 
result of neglecting their service to the gods. So they were happy to rebuild temples and dedicate pious 
works. Taxes were recycled back to the people through wages for labor in the rebuilding operations and 
canal maintenance. 

The Akkadian moneylenders had ruthlessly utilized the Sumerian Swindle and the inevitable 
results had been excessively burdensome, so the governor of Lagash re-instituted Urukagina's reforms 
of a hundred and twenty years earlier. Society once again operated in the ancient and natural way with 
the People serving the gods while sustaining the government and the governors serving the gods while 
protecting the People. 

Gudea was followed by his son, Ur-Ningirsu, and his grandson, Ugme, who between them ruled 
less than a decade. They were succeeded by Urgar, another of Ur-Bau's sons-in-law, whose rule, however, 
was ephemeral. There then followed the third of Ur-Bau's sons-in-law, Namhani, who was probably 
governor of Umma as well as of Lagash. The power of the Gutians in Sumerian society is reflected in 
a Sumerian year date under Namhani, who dates one of his inscriptions to the days when "Yarlagan 
was king of Gutium." [ 103 ] Sumerian society had once again attained the Ancient Way but the Gutian 
barbarians were still there, collecting tribute. 

Politics being what it is, alliances rise and fall as easily as taking off one cloak and putting on 
another. The Gutians were very useful to the Sumerians for helping to rid them of Akkadian domination. 
Unlettered and barbaric as they were, the Gutians recognized the advantage of cooperating with the 
civilized moneylenders and governors of Sumeria. As barbarians standing in awe of civilization, they 
allowed Sumerian culture to continue very much as "it had always been", even taking on the Sumerian 
religion and culture and becoming more civilized, themselves. The rich harvests of Mesopotamia gave 
them plenty of food and the silver and the trade goods of the merchants gave them the wealth through 
tribute and taxes that they could not glean from their mountain strongholds. 

But the Sumerians, who had been managing their society for a thousand years, were not happy 
with the Gutian barbarians lording over them. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], as well as 
the people, were losing money through the taxes and tribute required to support both the Sumerian 
government and the Gutian occupiers. So, the Sumerian people were ready to support whomever 
Sumerian leaders could rid them of this burden. They found their hero in Utuhegal of Uruk. Utuhegal led 
his people out of the wild, though benign, rule of the barbarian Gutians and into the grasping claws of 
the merchant-moneylenders. 


Warring against armed invaders requires both armaments and food. And these cost lots of silver. 
Who else had lots of silver other than the moneylenders who only loaned it out for a price? The price that 
the moneylenders asked of Utuhegal was a return to "the way it has always been" - but not with the debt- 
easing reforms of Urukagina that the governors of Lagash were practicing under Gutian protection. What 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] wanted was the "way it has always been" with the merchant- 
moneylenders practicing the Sumerian Swindle without restraints. With the backing of the moneylenders 
and the patriotism and blood of the People, Utuhegal of Uruk arose to break the Gutian yoke and to 
bring back the kingship to Sumeria. [ 104 ] 

Utuhegal of Uruk (2120-2114 BC) drove out the last of the Gutians and was duly recognized at 
Nippur as "King of the Four Regions" (a title first employed by Naram-Sin). Utuhegal was included in the 
Sumerian King List. This marks the re-emergence of the system of centralized government employed by 
Naram-Sin; subordinate city-states were ruled through governors who recognized Utuhegal as overlord. 


However, a popular uprising against the Gutian rule was not sufficient because good leadership of 
the post-war empire was also necessary. Although Utuhegal of Uruk could free the country of barbarians, 
he did not understand the basic threat to the well-being of the people that was caused by the invisible and 
pervasive Treasonous Class. In exchange for their support, he had agreed to do away with Urukagina's 
reforms. For Utuhegal, returning Sumeria to the way that "it had always been" meant allowing the 
moneylenders and merchants to swindle the People just as they had always done. So, high prices, false 
weights and measures from the thieving merchants; loan-sharking, foreclosures and debt-slavery from 
the greedy moneylenders; and extortionate transportation costs from the boatmen were once again 
allowed to increase under his rule. Utuhegal freed his people from the barbarian Gutians but he then 
turned them over to the ruthless swindles of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . 

In spite of his resounding victory in ridding the country of the Gutian barbarians, Utuhegal 
did not long hold power over Sumeria. He had the military strength but he lacked the moral strength 
to hold together a religious people. Under Utuhegal's rule, the people were being once again defrauded 
and swindled by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . They cried out to their priests for relief. 
After some seven years of corrupt rule, Utuhegal's throne was usurped by Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC), 
one of his more ambitious governors, who succeeded in founding the last important Sumerian dynasty, 
commonly known as the Third Dynasty of Ur. 

The Third Dynasty of Ur (2112-2004 BC) was a time of revival for all things Sumerian. The people 
glorified their ancient past, the Sumerian language was spoken once again and the entire Sumerian 
culture was revived "just as it had always been". Ur-Nammu, who reigned for sixteen years, proved to be 
a capable military leader, a great builder, and an outstanding administrator. He promulgated the first law 
code in man's recorded history. [ 106 ] 

At this point, I want to emphasize something in regard to laws. Laws are not usually made for 
no reason at all. When a need arises in society, laws are made to address that need. Just laws are made 
to protect both the people and society from those who would do harm. Unjust laws are made to protect 
the corrupt from just retribution. Merely because a law is created, does not mean that such a law is 
necessarily a just law. Some laws are created by corrupt officials that are unjust and designed to benefit 
only certain classes of people while causing injustice and harm to the rest of society. Modern society is 
filled with examples of this. So, again, I caution not to consider the ancient people to be inferior especially 
because they have proven to be superior to us in many ways. 

Be this as it may, Ur-Nammu is the first leader in history to see the injustices in his society and 
to try to correct them in an enduring way with written laws. In the previous three thousand years, 
what society had experienced was the usual tyranny of the strong over the weak and the rich over the 
poor. Although everyone could see the injustice in this, the problem had never before been addressed 


other than with the uneven and patched-together opinions over the millinia of the priests and kings 
and governors who were, themselves, not bound to any established reference of justice other than the 
opinions of their own minds and the urgings of their own hearts. Up until the time of Ur-Nammu, what 
laws there had been, were oral laws, laws that the king would declare but which were quickly forgotten, 
oral laws that did not survive the king. 

According to Sumerian belief, Mankind had been created by the gods to serve the gods. All that 
was necessary in Life was to do one's duty toward one's god. One's duty was very much as each man saw 
such a duty, combined with daily prayer and offerings. Other than this, there were no hard and fast rules 
of conduct for men except for the traditional mores involved in marriage, theft or murder. Marriage 
was handled in a tribal way between kin. Theft required a double replacement of the goods and murder 
required execution or banishment. These were all obvious social and legal situations that could be 
recognized by everyone. 

But even as society grew and evolved, the more subtle crimes of usury and its related corruptions 
of poverty, confiscation, foreclosure, slavery, crueltry debauchery, prostitution, and warfare, were not 
understood as being interrelated phenomenon. Nor were the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and 
their Sumerian Swindle recognized as the prime cause and profiteers of those crimes. But Ur-Nammu 
could witness with his own eyes the evil that had resulted which came from those who practiced money 
lending and dishonesty under the protection of king Utuhegel. So, as a means of gaining political power 
through promises to the people, he put a stop to those abuses of the moneylenders and he made laws 
to restrict them. With written laws, the power of both the king's decree and the power of the written 
contract were combined to give the common man a solid point of reference. With written laws, Ur- 
Nammu made a contract with the People. This contract was composed of laws that the king decreed 
along with the punishments to be meted out to those who broke the law, all ensconced within the 
unchangeable and eternal words written on the clay tablets for all to see. 

Among the many and varied documents of the Third Dynasty of Ur, a special group, largely 
from Lagash, reveal the structure and operation of an elaborate judicial system. Although the royal 
proclamation of social reforms and remission of debts was already known under two earlier govenors of 
Lagash - Entemena and Urukagina - it is Ur-Nammu who is especially remembered as the promulgator 
of the world's first-known law code. 

Court procedure is clearly shown in court records known as ditilla , literally "case closed", the 
phrase with which these tablets end. Proceedings were heard occasionally before the king himself, but 
more often by his govenors or his judges. Cases involved such subjects as breach of contract and disputed 
inheritance of property. From documents dealing with marriage law it is clear that the legal position of 
Sumerian women was equal to that of men. This equality should be noted because, over the centuries, as 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] gained wealth and power, the position of women deteriorated. 
Penalties were financial, not corporal. Because they were not Semites, lex talionis was unknown, or is at 
least unrecorded by the Sumerians at this period. [ 107 ] 

Even in modern times, Ur-Nammu's justice, piety and humanity shines brightly from his words 
written on those 4000 year-old tablets of clay. Again note, laws are generally made to address a social 
problem. Studying his words will give us insight into his solutions for the problems of his times. 

In the Laws of Ur-Nammu: 

"The mighty warrior, king of the city of Ur, of the lands of Sumer and Akkad ... he established 
21,600 silas (liters) of barley, 30 sheep, 30 silas (liters) of butter per month as regular offerings in 
the land." 

In this way, in his piety, he insured that the temples and priests were provided for while limiting 


what they could take from the people to a set amount of supplies. After all, it was the eternal gods whom 
they were serving, not a growing crowd of priestly families. 

"I, Ur-Nammu, mighty warrior, lord of the city of Ur, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, 
by the might of the Moon God, Nanna, my lord, by the true command of the Sun God, Utu, I 
established justice in the land." 

He promoted Namhani to be the governor of the city of Lagash. He re-established the trade 
between Magan (Oman) and Ur. This re-routed the Persian Gulf trade from Lagash to the quays of Ur. 

At that time, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had swindled the fields away from 
the People. These fields, Ur-Nammu returned to the rightful owners. The practice of taking away the 
livelihood of the People by confiscating their sheep and oxen was done away with. He righted whatever 
wrongs the People brought before him. 

Pirates (sea captains) were also a problem in the Persian Gulf. He established "freedom for the 
Akkadians and foreigners in the lands of Sumer and Akkad, for those conducting foreign maritime trade 
free from the sea-captains, for the herdsmen free from those (rustlers, thieves and moneylenders) who 
appropriate oxen, sheep and donkeys." He waged war against Anshan and freed the cities of Akshak, 
Marad, Girkal, Kazallu, Usarum and their settlements from oppression by the Gutians and the ravenous 

He freed the people from the thefts and frauds of the merchants by standardizing the weights and 
measures. No longer could the merchants buy a farmer's produce using large measures and heavy weights 
and then re-sell the produce using small measures and light weights. 

The river boatmen were also monopolizing the traffic and raising their prices for transporting 
goods and passengers. Ur-nammu put a stop to this and regulated the traffic, requiring inspections of 
goods and standardization of transportation charges. Along with the river traffic, he made the roads safe 
for travel. 

Like most modern day leaders and politicians, Ur-Nammu did not actually understand the 
moneylenders' fraud of the Sumerian Swindle. But he could see with his own eyes and feel with his 
own heart the wrongness that was the result. So, he forbad the enslaving of people for debt. Unlike our 
craven modern politicians who allow the bankers and credit card swindlers to defraud our wealth and 
impoverish our modern nations in their entirety, Ur-Nammu did not allow the rich and powerful to take 
advantage or defraud the poor and the weak. The widow could no longer be enslaved for the debts of her 
dead husband. The orphan could no longer be enslaved for the debts of his dead parents. Ur-Nammu did 
not allow the moneylenders to seize and enslave people for debt. If they did so, they would be imprisoned 
and pay 15 shekels of silver to their victim. Slavery was an accepted social position in those ancient times, 
so Ur-Nammu made just laws to protect both the slaves and the masters. 

Ur-Nammu put a stop to the excesses of the moneylenders. But, like so many leaders who 
followed him, he did not put a stop to lending-at-interest simply because "it has always been here." 
Dishonest swindle that it is, he overlooked its criminality because it was practiced long before he was 
born. So, he accepted lending-at-interest as an ordinary business model. 

In the Laws of Ur-Nammu, he stated: 

"I did not deliver the orphan to the rich, 

I did not deliver the widow to the mighty. 

I did not deliver the man with but one shekel to the man with 60 shekels. 

I did not deliver the man with but one sheep to the man with one ox." 


He did not place his own relatives over the citizens of the various towns as had been done by most 
previous kings and governors but he settled them in their own lands and did not allow them to tell him 
how to run the empire. 

"I did not impose orders, I eliminated enmity, violence and cries for justice. I established justice in 
the land." 

Unlike the modern Jewish lawyers and Communists who tear down society by promoting murder 
and crime while they protect criminals from justice, Ur-Nammu used his god-given common sense in his 

E "If a man commits a homicide, they shall kill that man." 

What is unusual about this law is that it protected the poor from being murdered by the rich as 
well as the rich being murdered by the poor. In those early days of somewhat lawless societies, if a rich 
moneylender could not collect the principle and interest on a loan, he could enslave and beat the debtor. 
If he killed him, there was not anything except personal vendetta that the poor could do. Likewise, after 
a moneylender had seized a farm or enslaved a beloved daughter, the poor might retaliate with a physical 
attack. Walking in the marketplace or in the countryside became dangerous pastimes for a moneylender 
if his vengeful victims could hide in wait some dark night and beat or kill him. With Ur-Nammu's Laws, 
both the rich and the poor were equally punished for murder. 

In disputes, where the judges could not make a determination of truth, the divine River Ordeal 
was used to determine truth from falsehood. There was none of the lex talionis "eye-for-an-eye" cruelty 
of the Semites in the Laws of Ur-Nammu. If a man brought physical injury to another, the law merely 
prescribed a payment in silver, not the reprisal of an equal injury committed upon him.[ 108 ] 

It is not merely as a law-giver that Ur-Nammu's memory should be cherished but as an example 
of a true leader in the Natural Way of Life, a king who served God by also serving his people. Ur-nammu 
was a rarity among men. 

It was also rare for a king to die in battle. Ur-Nammu - to judge from the statement that "he had 
been abandoned in the battlefield like a crushed vessel" - probably died in battle with the Gutians, who, 
in spite of Utuhegal's great victory, continued to trouble Sumeria throughout the period of the Third 
Dynasty of Ur. He was succeeded by his son, Shulgi, who ruled forty-eight years and ushered in a period 
of relative peace and prosperity for Sumeria. [ 109 ] It was a time when the People served god, the king 
protected the people, and the merchants and moneylenders were restrained in their greed. And all was 

Shulgi was also motivated by economic concerns. He was anxious to expand the northeastern 
trade routes, which afforded access to lapis lazuli and tin for the manufacture of bronze. [ no ] Leaders of 
society cannot ignore the economic needs of society. But like so many other leaders, the corrosive effects 
of those who operated the Sumerian Swindle went uncorrected, like festering boils on society as the 
various merchants and moneylenders in every city worked their swindles. 

Politically, however, the most important feature of the new dynasty was the return to prominence 
of the city of Ur. Already at an earlier period (around 2600 B.C.) Ur had been a leading center of 
Sumerian civilization, and it was in royal tombs of that period that Sir Leonard Woolley discovered 
the famous art treasures with which his name is associated. Now, at about 2100 BC, Ur had become 
the capital of the Third Dynasty of Ur, which governed the whole of Mesopotamia with an efficient 
bureaucracy. Wealth flowed into the capital by way of the Persian Gulf. We have some of the actual 
trading documents showing that the great temple of Ur exported textiles and cooking oil to the distant 


port of Magan (Oman), in exchange for copper, beads and ivory. [ m ] 

Although the merchant-moneylenders could not get back everything that they had lost because 
of the reforms of Urukagina and the Laws of Ur-Nammu, or from the thefts by the Semitic invaders 
of Sargon, or the tribute paid to the Gutians, they knew that time was on their side. "Time benefits 
the banker and betrays the borrower" was Secret Fraud #10 of the Sumerian Swindle. As long as a 
moneylender can charge interest on a loan, simple arithmetic proves that he can, with enough time, own 
the entire world. 

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and their scribes had long known Secret Fraud #14 of 
the Sumerian Swindle: "Anyone who is allowed to lend- at- interest eventually owns the entire world." This 
was powerful incentive for the tamkarum . With such knowledge, the moneylenders made it a part of 
their strategy to make ownership of the entire world their main goal. Driven by the relentless arithmetic 
of the Sumerian Swindle, it could be no other way for them. Either the Sumerian Swindle would be 
discovered for the fraud that it is and stopped by the People and the Kings, or it would continue and all 
nations and all people on earth would become the private property and slaves of the moneylenders. There 
were no other options. 

The Sumerian Swindle that the ancient bankers worked, is the same that the modern bankers 
are today using to defraud the people of wealth and freedom. Again, it's just simple arithmetic. Again, 
consider its simplicity. Let's say there are only two shekels of silver in the world and a banker has one 
of them and the other is in circulation in the society. Let's say this moneylender loans his shekel out at 
fifty percent interest. What comes back to him is one and a half shekels of silver, leaving one -half shekel 
in circulation among the people. Now, if the banker again loans out one shekel at fifty percent interest, 
what comes back to him is again one and a half shekels of silver. He now possesses both shekels. He 
now possesses all of the money in the world. The people no longer have any money to circulate and so a 
Depression is created, businesses fail and people are no longer employed and society suffers. The only one 
with money is the banker who is able to use the wealth that he has swindled to buy up cheap properties. 
And if he again loans out the money, since there is nothing left in circulation, he is able to confiscate all 
of the real property that was put up as collateral. So, if bankers are allowed to loan-money- at-interest, 
eventually through simple arithmetic, the banks come into possession of all of the wealth and all of the 
property on earth. It's just simple arithmetic. But it is also an ancient secret that the bankers want to keep 
hidden. How else can you be swindled unless you are also deceived? 

The Third Dynasty of Ur was Sumerian civilization in its most fully developed form. Tablets in 
vast numbers have been excavated from the period of the Third Dynasty of Ur - perhaps fifteen thousand 
legal, administrative and economic documents already translated and published, and perhaps a hundred 
thousand or more still untranslated and unpublished. 

Texts from Umma also provide an extraordinary picture of day-to-day administration. Daily 
numbers of men working in the fields, digging canals, harvesting, loading and towing canal boats were 
recorded. The amount of work completed was noted, and rates of work and pay minutely calculated. 
Female workers were tabulated cutting reeds, draining fields, harvesting, and as weavers and in the mill 
house. Ration texts detail the issue of "pay" in the form of beer, bread, oil, onions, seeds for seasoning and 
fish. Beer was a basic commodity and its quality was carefully controlled. Inspections were often carried 
out, according to one text by a royal princess, and in another, by a constable of the king; "ordinary", 
"royal", "strong" and "weak" beer were brewed. Closely associated with the control of state herds, was a 
profitable industry in wool and leather. Merchants were only allowed to operate by royal warrant. They 
imported a great variety of goods by land and sea: exotic foods, aromatic woods, fruits and herbs, raw 
materials for industries such as tanning and metal- working, timber for roof beams and ship-building. 
Such items were paid for largely with agricultural products such as wool, barley, wheat, dates, fish oil, 
dried fish and skins. Silver had become a standard of value. Silver served as a medium of account, thus 


already fulfilling all of the classical functions of money. Long lists of commodities valued in silver provide 
the earliest price index for the staples of Mesopotamian life. [ 112 ] These price lists not only established 
prices but also indexed the various goods in relation to silver so that they could be used directly in barter. 
Again, silver was a commodity money not a true money. The ancient Near East was a barter economy. 

At Ur, the quays too were rebuilt, and a year-name early in Ur-Nammu's reign records "the 
return of the ships of Magan (Oman) and Meluhka (India) into the hands of (the Moon God) Nanna." 
Ur-Nammu's devotion to the ancient shrines, particularly at Nippur, brought him recognition there by 
Enlil's priesthood and early in his reign he adopted a new title, "King of Sumer and Akkad", which was to 
assume great importance in the succeeding centuries. His coronation at Nippur was commemorated in a 
new literary genre, the so-called royal hymn, which was addressed not to the gods but to the king himself 
as a god . 

The exalted position of the kings of Ur is even more evident during the reign of Shulgi, who not 
only continued his father's administrative, architectural and literary interests, but went one step further 
in emulating the later Agade kings. Sometime early in his reign he assumed divine status. Shrines were 
erected for him. Local manifestations of the royal god were worshipped and more royal hymns composed 
in his honor than are known for any other Mesopotamian king. Like Sargon and Naram-Sin, Shulgi 
became in later times a favorite literary figure. Both the great scribal schools at Nippur and at Ur traced 
their foundation to him. And he was a devoted patron of Sumerian literature and culture, even claiming 
to have been trained in his youth as a scribe. Such education was as rare for a Mesopotamian king as 
it was for most members of society. [ 113 ] Besides the temple priests, only the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had a high literacy rate since written contracts and calculations for silver amounts were 
their business. 

Direct archaeological evidence witnesses to a considerable material prosperity at this time, in that 
almost everywhere traces of building activity are discernible. Ur-Nammu built or rebuilt temples in many 
of the ancient cities, including Uruk, Lagash, Nippur and Eridu, but his most striking work was at his 
capital, Ur. Here he rebuilt, in honour of the Moon-god Nanna, the ziggurat, a great rectangular stepped 
tower in three stages, - about two hundred feet by one hundred and fifty at the base and perhaps seventy 
feet high with a shrine on top. This gigantic stack of mud bricks, restored by later kings, still stands today 
as a monument to the piety of Ur-Nammu. [ 114 ] 

But the Third Dynasty of Ur collapsed after about a century, leaving Sumer and Akkad in 
temporary chaos. The main factor in the collapse was a fresh movement of Semitic peoples, this time the 
group called the Amurru. [ 115 ] "Amurru" in Sumerian means "west". These people from the West became 
known to us as Amurru or Amorites. 

It was difficult to keep these people out of Mesopotamia because the land was relatively flat 
and lacked any natural defenses other than the mud-brick walls of the cities, the military skills of the 
governors, and the fighting spirit of the people. In all of these categories, it is always the fighting spirit 
and morale of the People that is the paramount and most vital element. When this spirit is weakened 
or subverted or diluted in any way, all other factors cannot fill the breech. The Third Dynasty of Ur 
was strong and prosperous but it could not withstand the subterranean and corrosive influence of the 
moneylenders and merchants. Once again, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] worked diligently to 
enrich themselves at the expense of the very existence of their own people. 

The Sumerian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had prospered during the Third Dynasty of 
Ur, indeed, all of the People had prospered when they served God. The greed of the merchants was kept 
in check by the king because they were only allowed to do business under a royal warrant or license. With 
over-sight by the king's agents, profits were reduced because false weights and measures, excessive interest 
rates, illegal seizures of debt-slaves and property and other of their criminal tricks were not allowed. And 
yet, the Sumerian Swindle was still their secret method for over-coming such obstacles. 


Just "as it had always been", the moneylenders and landlords of Mesopotamia had been renting 
and selling the land to foreigners and using cheap immigrant labor to enrich themselves throughout 
the entire history of Sumeria. By mixing foreigners into the native population, they were diluting the 
morale and spirit of the People and creating mixed loyalties, all while stuffing their counting houses 
with silver and their barns with grain. Immigrants gave them cheap labor to farm their foreclosed fields 
and orchards and to undermine the native labor of the Sumerian workers. Because they had to lower 
their own wages in order to compete with the cheap immigrant labor, the People were reduced to a 
lower economic level and robbed of the income necessary to pay their debts to the moneylenders. Thus, 
immigrant labor brought poverty and enslavement to the People while enriching the moneylenders. 

As the Amorite immigrants displaced the Sumerian workers, unemployed Sumerian workers 
were hired by the kings and city governors as soldiers to defend the ever-increasing wealth of the awilum 
[the Haves] . Although the Laws of Ur-Nammu ameliorated the rapacity of the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] over the People, his laws did not prevent their subversion of the State. Subversion of the 
State and impoverishment of the People are the inevitable results of the Sumerian Swindle. 

The Laws of Ur-Nammu also put the moneylenders on alert. Their swindles were not understood 
by the people, the priests or by the kings because the Sumerian Swindle was accepted from ancient times 
just "as it had always been". Lending-at-interest and its related frauds and swindles, were simple like a 
lever and fulcrum. As simple as a lever is, its power can move the world. The methods of the Sumerian 
Swindle are also simple, so simple that it is easy to overlook their diabolical power. 

The people of Sumeria respected the ancient ways that they had followed for thousands of years. 
Yet the unjustness of the resulting poverty and enslavement that money lending led to, was obvious to all. 
As society prospered, the various family groups could avoid borrowing at interest from the moneylenders 
merely by following the ancient way of loaning to one another within the family. This could avoid interest 
payments while simultaneously strengthening family bonds and family wealth. It was most efficiently 
practiced within large families. 

The large and conspiring moneylender families and guilds wanted to prevent this from happening 
since it reduced their incomes. Their greatest profits came from ignorant and illiterate People who could 
not read written contracts or understand either simple or compound interest rates. So, the solution to 
the problem of too many Sumerian people understanding the moneylenders' swindle was to eliminate 
the more intelligent Sumerians and substitute them with ignorant victims. And so, both war and 
immigration became tools in the moneylenders' technique at a very early time. War was used to kill off 
the best and the brightest of the people while immigration was used to substitute less intelligent people 
to take the Sumerian peoples' place on the debt-slavery treadmill. In this way, Secret Fraud #11 of the 
Sumerian Swindle was perfected: "Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding 
the greatest profit for the bankers when the people are impoverished." 

No matter what king ruled or what god resided in the temples, all of society ran smoothly on 
the invention of silver as a means of exchange for goods and services. Silver was not a true money. It 
was a type of commodity money It was an ingenious method for helping society function smoothly, 
like oil lubricating a machine. Silver was a good and natural invention for commercial exchange as 
long as that was its sole function. When silver (as a type of commodity money) was used to generate 
profits through interest and usury, it became a perverse and unnatural creature controlled by perverse 
and unnatural men. Those who understood money were the only ones who profited from money while 
all others became the slaves of the moneylenders - all others included kings, governors, priests and 
people. Everybody became slaves except the moneylenders. Although the moneylenders had slyly and 
surreptitiously enslaved the people, they were not the masters of the people; they were the betrayers of 
the people. 

The scheming moneylenders were well aware of the Sumerian Swindle and the secret frauds and 


powers of money. They profited from the fools who didn't understand that moneylending- at- interest is 
a hoax and swindle. For the criminal tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], their only concern was in 
obtaining more wealth so as to buy more power and then to use that power to gain more wealth. And 
they devised a variety of stratagems for their successful acquisitions of both. As previously explained, the 
"illegal aliens" of Mesopotamia - the immigrants, the Amorite shepherds and goat herders, the cheap 
foreign laborers from other countries whom the Treasonous Class had imported - became a prime 
method for the moneylenders to enrich themselves and undermining the nation. Most, but not all, of 
these immigrant laborers were Semitic Amorites from the Arabian deserts to the west and the Syrian 
plains to the northwest. 

Other non-Semitic peoples were also in evidence at this time, in particular the Hurrians, who 
became of high importance later in the middle of the second millennium. There were already Hurrian 
workers at Nippur during Sargon's Dynasty (-2334-2150 BC). They were employed in manufacturing 
garments and were probably prisoners-of-war taken in the Zagros mountains. A coalition of peoples in 
the west also came into military conflict with Naram-Sin, inflicting upon him a severe defeat. [ 116 ] So 
there were a variety of different peoples with different language groups who were eager to acquire for 
themselves the fertile plains and advanced culture of Mesopotamia. But by far the largest group of these 
people were the Semitic Amorites whose many wives produced children "countless as the sands of the 

References to these Amorites become more and more frequent during the Third Dynasty of Ur. 
One passage shows the contempt of the city dwelling Sumerians for the savage desert dwellers, who are 
described as "the Amurru, . . . who eats raw meat, who has no house in his lifetime, and after he dies lies 
unburied". Quickly however, these Amorites ceased to be despised desert savages and became a despised 
threat to the security and the very existence of the Third Dynasty of Ur. Some of the rulers of that dynasty 
built fortifications against these people. Such measures did not, however, succeed in holding back the 
mounting pressure. The ancient cities gradually fell under the domination of the Amorites. But it was a 
domination through subversion rather than through warfare. These foreigners had "friends" behind the 
city walls. 

Under the empire of the Third Dynasty of Ur there was a considerable amount of peaceful 
penetration into Babylonia by the Amorites, as the presence of West Semitic names in lists of temple 
personnel clearly shows. The merchant-moneylenders once again used the trick that had worked so well 
for them for twenty-five centuries. They sold the foreclosed land to foreigners. With their contacts and 
business associates scattered along the trade routes of the ancient Near East, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had become an international treason organization. They were a secret menace that 
continued with its underground existence while its members went about their lives as respected members 
of society doing business and making loans just as "it had always been". 

But the Amorites were not fools. They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy 
the land and the disadvantages to the Sumerian farmers. So, their natural suspicions prompted them to 
ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 
because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Amorites had no reason to hate the Sumerian moneylenders, 
yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new 


immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at 
low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the Sumerian moneylenders jumped from their old victims 
who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and 
guides and mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around 
its prey. It's bite would come later. 

With their high birth rate as a result of many wives and unlimited sexual proclivities, the 
expansion of Semitic people continued for about two centuries and left a lasting mark on the culture of 
the area in its political, religious and social aspects. These immigrants (referred to by modern authorities 
variously as East Canaanites, West Semites or Amorites) settled in a number of ancient centers where 
they formed kingdoms which showed some important differences from the earlier Sumerian temple- 
states. They were different, too, from the last independent Sumerian political unit, the Third Dynasty of 

One of the main differences was in the conception of land tenure. In the original pattern of 
Sumerian society, the city's land belonged to the local god, while in the Semitic conception land could 
be owned by the clan, the king or the private citizen. [ 117 ] It was this conception of private property 
that the land-owning and slave-owning moneylenders desired to perpetuate. They wanted to maintain 
ownership of their loot by claiming that "property rights" were superior to either the "rights of kings" or 
"the rights of the gods" or the "rights of the people." The rights of the moneylenders to own all property 
and to enslave all people, was the only rights that they were interested in promoting. Since they could not 
convince the religious Sumerians of this, it was the conspiracy of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] 
guilds to use immigrant labor and foreign kings to promote their schemes through subversion and 
treason. After all, their trade routes "embraced" all countries. 

The Third Dynasty of Ur finally crumbled under the pressure of Amorite immigrants who had 
attained positions of authority and who then betrayed the Sumerians. At first, city after city ceased to 
acknowledge the sovereignty of Ur. The final overthrow of the Dynasty was, however, not actually the 
work of the Amorites, but of the Elamites (from southern Persia), who seized the opportunity offered by 
Semitic betrayal to sack and occupy Ur, slaughtering the inhabitants and carrying away the king. This 
stunning blow, marking the final overthrow of the Sumerians as a political power, shows clear evidence 
in the relics of destruction found when Ur was excavated. This disastrous event was long remembered 
through the cuneiform writings of Babylonia. [ 118 ] The fall of Ur marks the beginning of what 
archeologists have named the Old Babylonian Period (2000-1750 BC), a time of contentious Amorite 

This destruction of the Third Dynasty of Ur was brought about by and is an example of the 
reliance of these people on their gods. The fear that the Sumerians had of their gods created much 
superstition. In fact, the fear that all people in the ancient world had for their gods was remarkable. 
Omens and predictions based upon such things as the markings in the liver of a sheep could determine 
the choices that men and women made in their lives. Which way a certain kind of bird flew in the 
morning, the direction smoke traveled, dust-devils on the desert, whether a dog howled in the night, the 
meaning of one's dreams and thousands of other omens were looked for and accepted as messages from 
the gods for a man's daily choices in life. Important decisions such as whether or not to go to war were 
made solely on the divination over a sheep's liver. 

One example of this was the last king of the Third Dynasty of Ur, who had been cursed by the 
markings on a sheep's liver. Modern archeologists have heaped much distain upon the unfortunate Ibbi- 
Sin for his weakness in defending his Sumerian empire. His cuneiform letters are full of begging and 
fearful pleading to his subordinates as he attempted to hold the crumbling empire together. But he had 
inherited an empire that his own father, Shu-Sin, had cursed by believing the omens found in a sheep's 
liver. Shu-Sin's inscriptions predicted the disasters that would befall his son and successor, Ibbi-Sin 


(2028-2004 BC).[ 119 ] And Ibbi-Sin believed that these predictions would come to pass. So, regardless of 
his own intelligence, he was a victim of superstitious prediction that - avoid it though he tried - came 
to pass through his acceptance of its inevitability. His surviving letters attest to his pitiful pleas for help 
from treacherous allies. And they record his Sumerian reliance upon the will of the gods. In his case, the 
predictions that a priest made over a sheep's liver became a self-fulfilling prophesy. 

Ibbi-Sin succeeded in holding on as ruler of Sumeria for twenty- four years. But throughout his 
reign his situation was insecure and even pathetic. Much of the time he was confined to the city of Ur 
itself, which often suffered from hunger and famine. As a result of the incursions of the Amorites and 
the attacks of the Elamites, his empire finally tottered and crumbled while the governors of all the more 
important cities of Sumeria found it advisable to abandon their king and to fend for themselves. We learn 
of this piteous state of affairs primarily from Ibbi-Sin's correspondence with his provincial governors, 
which provides a graphic picture of the rather confused and pathetic Ibbi-Sin and of his scheming, 
ambitious, and double-dealing functionaries. One such was an Amorite governor by the name of Ishbi- 
Erra, who was in charge of the city of Isin. 

The text of three letters belonging to this royal correspondence contains a report sent to Ibbi-Sin 
by the scheming Semite, Ishbi-Erra, on the results of a grain-buying expedition with which Ibbi-Sin had 
charged him. The letter sheds considerable light on the incursions of the Amorites into western Sumeria 
as well as on the difficulties the Elamites were making for Ibbi-Sin. 

Ishbi-Erra begins his report with the statement that he had succeeded in buying seventy-two 
thousand gur of grain at the normal price of one shekel per gur . (1 shekel per gur; 1 gur = 300 liters). So, 
grain was very cheap even during wartime. This scheming Amorite heard that his Amorite relatives had 
entered Sumeria and had "seized the great fortresses one after the other." So, he shipped the grain not to 
Ur, the capital where it was desperately needed, but to his own city of Isin from where he sent an artful 
letter to the besieged Ibbi-Sin. "If the king would now send me six hundred boats of one hundred twenty 
gur each," his letters say, "I will deliver the grain to the various cities of Sumeria." However, he continues, 
"I should be put in charge of the places where the boats are to be moored." In other words, Secret Fraud 
#21, "Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body." Ishbi- 
Erra was asking the king to give him authority over all territories where he could moor a grain boat. 

The letter closes with a hypocritical plea to Ibbi-Sin not to give in to the Elamites, "because I have 
enough grain to satisfy the hunger of the Palace and its cities for fifteen years." This was a very strong 
form of blackmail to make to the starving king of Ur. In any case, he pleads, the king must put him in 
charge of both Isin and the holy city of Nippur. 

The scheming Ishbi-Erra was also in charge of the king's northern troops. Since he was able to 
carry the grain to Isin by boat, he had both the troops and the transportation to deliver the grain to Ibbi- 
Sin at Ur. He had all of the advantages and he used them to wrest control of Sumeria from Ibbi-Sin. So, he 
pressed his advantages and in mock loyalty pleaded with the king to declare him to be governor of both 
Isin and Nippur. 

That Ibbi-Sin actually did entrust Nippur and Isin to him we learn from his letter of reply. 
Unfortunately for king Ibbi-Sin, Ishbi-Erra was as disloyal as he was capable and competent. With plenty 
of grain and troops, he was successful not only in defending Isin and Nippur but in usurping his master's 
throne as well. This we learn, not from Ishbi-Erra's correspondence with Ibbi-Sin but from a letter written 
to the king by Puzur-Numushda, a governor of the city Kazallu, along with king Ibbi-Sin's reply. 

According to Puzur-Numushda's letter, the treasonous Ishbi-Erra had become firmly established 
as the ruler of Isin, which he had turned into his royal residence. He had, moreover, subdued Nippur and 
extended his sway all along the Tigris and Euphrates from Hamazi in the north and east to the Persian 
Gulf. He had taken prisoner those of king Ibbi-Sin's governors who had remained loyal and returned 
to office those who had been dismissed by king Ibbi-Sin because of their disloyalty. Ibbi-Sin's pathetic 


impotence and pitiable vacillation are revealed in his answer to Puzur-Numushda. Ibbi-Sin realized 
full well that the latter was on the point of betraying him because Puzur-Numushda had actually failed 
to march to the help of Ibbi-Sin's loyal governors although a select body of troops had been put at his 
disposal for that purpose. But he could do nothing more than plead with him to stay loyal. Ibbi-Sin 
believed desperately that somehow Ishbi-Erra, "who is not of Sumerian seed," would fail in his ambition 
to become master of Sumeria and that the Elamites would be defeated. Ibbi-Sin wrote that "Enlil has 
stirred up the Amorites out of their land, and they will strike down the Elamites and capture Ishbi-Erra." 
But king Ibbi-Sin was referring to the very Amorites who had been plaguing Sumeria from the days of his 
father, the same Amorites that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had been immigrating in large 
numbers as farm workers; the same Amorites to whom the moneylenders had sold the foreclosed farms; 
the very Amorites of whom the treasonous Ishbi-Erra was one. 

With the growth of Ishbi-Erra's independence and power, Sumeria found itself under the rule of 
two kings, Ibbi-Sin, whose dominion was limited to his capital at Ur, and Ishbi-Erra who controlled most 
of the other cities of Sumeria from his capital at Isin. 

In the twenty- fifth year of Ibbi-Sin's reign, the Elamites besieged Ur, but they could not capture 
it. But as a result of the siege, severe famine overtook Ur's defenders. In desperation, they unlocked the 
city gate. The Elamites brutally slaughtered everybody and ransacked homes and temples. The poetic 
"Lamentation over the Destruction of Ur" recorded this tragedy: 

"Dead men, not potsherds, covered the approaches, 

The walls were gaping, the high gates, the roads, were piled with dead. 

In the side streets, where feasting crowds would gather, 

Scattered they lay. 

In all the streets and roadways bodies lay. 

In open fields that used to fill with dancers, they lay in heaps. 

The country's blood now filled its holes, like metal in a mold; 

Bodies dissolved - like fat left in the sun."[ 120 ] 

The Elamites carried off king Ibbi-Sin a prisoner, leaving a garrison in control of the city. Several 
years later Ishbi-Erra attacked this garrison and drove it out of Ur, thus becoming king of all Sumeria, 
with Isin as his capital. [ 121 ] 

The treasonous Ishbi-Erra founded a dynasty at Isin which endured for over two centuries, 
although its later rulers were not his direct descendants. This is known as the Isin-Larsa Period (2006- 
1884 BC). Theoretically, the city-state of Isin laid claim to the suzerainty of all Sumeria and Akkad. 
Actually, however, the land was dividing into a number of city-states under separate rulers because there 
was no longer a centralized empire. For close to a century, it is true, Isin remained the most powerful of 
these states. It controlled Ur, the old imperial capital and shipping terminal for the Persian Gulf trade as 
well as Nippur, which continued as Sumeria's spiritual and intellectual center throughout this period. 

The fourth ruler of the Isin dynasty, Ishme-Dagan, boasts in his archives of restoring Nippur to 
its former glory. So, even while the Sumerians were being ruled by the Semitic Amorites, the traditional 
Sumerian religious values were being maintained. Prior to his reign, Isin seems to have suffered a severe 
attack at the hands of an enemy, perhaps the Assyrians who were gaining power in the north. His son 
and successor, Lipit-Ishtar (1934-1924 BC), claimed control over the major cities of Sumeria and took the 
proud title "king of Sumer and Akkad." 

But Lipit-Ishtar was not the sort of king who was popular with the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] because he had the ancient idea that the leaders of society should serve and protect the 
People rather than to serve and protect the merchants and moneylenders. 


Early in his reign, Lipit-Ishtar promulgated a new Sumerian law code, which was later the model 
for the renowned Law Code of Hammurabi. The Laws of Lipit-Ishtar were written in the traditional 
Sumerian language about 160 years after the Sumerian king Ur-Nammu's Law Code and about 140 
years before the Semitic Hammurabi's Law Code. They show a similar concern for maintaining peace by 
eliminating arguments among the people but are, as you shall see, much different in their social intent. 

The Third Dynasty of Ur had marked a return of Sumerian kingship over the Sumerian people 
in a Sumerian Renaissance of language and culture and moral values. The Laws of Urukagina and 
Ur-Nammu, also written in Sumerian, both show a desire to maintain a holy society under God and 
to free the people from the oppression of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. But because the 
moneylenders and wily merchants had "always been here", it never occurred to the Sumerians that the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were not legitimate businessmen but were, in fact, criminals. So, 
laws were never made that specifically penalized their crimes. Instead, the laws were made merely to 
soften the results of their crimes while they were allowed to practice business "just as it had always been." 

Although Lipit-Ishtar wrote his laws in Sumerian and even though most of his subjects were 
Sumerians, he, himself, was an Amorite. His laws reflect both the necessity of freeing the People from 
oppression while allowing the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] the continued practice of the 
Sumerian Swindle to betray and defraud Society. 

Semitic king Lipit-Ishtar begins his Laws by extolling the greatest of the Sumerian gods such as 
An, the Sky god and father of all the other gods, and Enlil, the god of the air. Lipit-Ishtar wrote: 

"At that time, the gods An and Enlil called Lipit-Ishtar to be prince of the land - Litpit-Ishtar, the 
wise Shepherd, whose name has been pronounced by the god Nunamnir - in order to establish 
justice in the land, to eliminate cries for justice, to eradicate enmity and armed violence, to bring 
well-being to the lands of Sumer and Akkad." 

"At that time, I, Lipit-Ishtar, the pious Shepherd of the city of Nippur, the faithful husbandman 
of the city of Ur, he who does not forsake the city of Eridu, the befitting lord of the city of Uruk, 
the king of the city if Isin, king of the lands of Sumer and Akkad, the heart's desire of the goddess 
Inanna, by the command of the god Enlil, I established justice in the lands of Sumer and Akkad." 

He goes on to say that "at that time I liberated the sons and daughters" of the cities of Ur, Isin, 
Sumer and Akkad who had been enslaved by the yoke of the moneylenders. But the debauchery that 
the moneylenders had brought to the land through their use of alcohol and gambling and whoring and 
warfare had also produced orphans and illegitimate children who had been abandoned by their fathers. 
And because of the loose morals brought on by war and usury, the family bonds between fathers and sons 
and daughters and mothers had been broken so that the children were not taking care of their parents in 
old age. Lipit-Ishtar, the good king, decreed that they mend their ways. The Good Shepherd took care of 
his people. 

He obligated public works for mending and weeding the canals. Military service was an obligation 
of each household depending upon whether the household was composed of the wealthy or of the poor 
laborers. The wealthier households were required to do public works for seventy days per year while 
laborers were required ten days per month. Once again, the rich were required to work less. After all, the 
awilum [the Haves] were the leaders of Society and part of their work was found in that leadership. And 
yet, even they were required to do seventy days of manual labor per year. 

Striking a woman so that she lost her baby cost the aggressor 30 shekels of silver. The same crime 
to a slave woman cost 5 shekels of silver. If the woman died, it was a capital offense. 

As a characteristic of Semitic rule, ownership of property was given a much higher status than the 


laborer who farmed the property. Lipit-Ishtar's Law stated: 

■ "If he leases an orchard to a gardener in an orchard lease, the gardener shall plant for the owner 
of the orchard and the garderner shall have the use of the dates from one-tenth of the palm trees." 
(Thus, the landlord got his orchard farmed for a cost to him of only ten percent of the produce.) 

Following Sumerian custom, thieves were not tortured or imprisoned but were required to pay a fine: 

■ "If a man enters the orchard of another man and is seized there for thievery, he shall weigh and 
deliver ten shekels of silver." 

Again, following the humane Sumerian cultural customs, property damage was also fined: 

■ "If a man cuts down a tree in another man's orchard, he shall weigh and deliver twenty shekels of 

And yet, the moneylenders were allowed a double profit, but no more than a double profit, from their 
debt-slaves. Remember, these slaves were Mediterranean, Caucasian, and Indo-European people, not 

■ "If a man's slave contests his slave status against his master, and it is proven that his master has 
been compensated for his slavery two-fold, that slave shall be freed." 

Thus, the moneylender doubled his money on what a debt-slave owed him in addition to 
whatever he had already collected on the original debt. But debt-slaves who did not challenge their status 
could be enslaved for life. And debt-slaves were not entirely restricted. They had freedom of movement in 
their free-time: 

■ "If a debt-slave goes into service to a man of his own free will, that man will not restrict him but 
that debt- slave may go wherever he wishes." 

Slaves were also sex slaves of the masters. But for a master to make his slave pregnant meant that 
she was released from slavery. This prevented a ruthless slave master from increasing the number of his 
slaves merely by making them pregnant or to use them without cost to himself. Illegitimate slave children 
would also cause social disharmony as the children fought over inheritance. For the slave women to be 
forced to bear children without also being cared for, was prohibited in this way: 

■ "If a man marries a wife and she bears him a child and the child lives and a slave woman also 
bears a child for her master, the father shall free the slave woman and her child; the children of 
the slave woman will not divide the estate with the children of the master." 

And in this way: 

■ "If his first-ranking wife dies and after his wife's death he marries the slave woman (who had 
borne him children) the child of his first-ranking wife shall be his (primary) heir; the child whom 
the slave woman bore to her master is considered equal to a native free-born son and they shall 
make good his (share of the) estate." 


And in this way: 

■ "If a man's wife does not bear him a child but a prostitute from the street does bear him a 
child, he shall provide grain, oil and clothing rations for the prostitute, and the child whom the 
prostitute bore him shall be his heir. As long as his wife is alive, the prostitute shall not reside in 
the house with his first-ranking wife." 

And in this way: 

■ "If a man's first-ranking wife loses her attractiveness or becomes a paralytic, she will not be 
evicted from the house; however, her husband may marry a healthy wife, and the second wife 
shall support the first-ranking wife." 

To protect the thieving merchant-moneylenders, false testimony and slander were also dealt with: 

■ "If a man, without grounds, accuses another man of a matter of which he has no knowledge, 
and that man does not prove it, he shall bear the penalty of the matter for which he made the 

Moneylenders were in the habit of paying the delinquent taxes on property and then claiming ownership 
of the property merely for the price of its tax. But this was prohibited in a fair way like this: 

■ "If the master or mistress of an estate defaults on the taxes due from the estate and an outsider 
assumes the taxes, he (the master) will not be evicted for three years; (but after three years 
defaulting on the taxes) the man who has assumed the tax burden shall take possession of the 
estate and the (original) master of the estate will not make any claims." 

And so, Lipit-Ishtar was a Good Shepherd for his people. Although he, himself, was a Semitic 
Amorite, most of his people were Sumerians and he ruled them with Sumerian ethics. He protected 
women with humane Sumerian ethics and protected the People with justice and the "straight path". He 
claimed: "In accordance with the true word of the god Utu, I made the lands of Sumer and Akkad hold 
fair judicial procedure. In accordance with the utterance of the god Enlil, I, Lipit-Ishtar, son of Enlil, 
eradicated enmity and violence. I made weeping, lamentation, shouts for justice and suits taboo. I made 
right and truth shine forth, and I brought well-being to the lands of Sumer and Akkad." [ 122 ] In this way, 
Lipit-Ishtar shows the moral uprightness and spiritual goodness of the Sumerian People as well as how 
the earliest Amorites followed in their path. 

But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had already had experience with kings of high 
morals and feelings of civic duty. In their experience, kings who served the country and protected 
the People were bad for business. Kings who were honest, virtuous or religious were not as easy to 
manipulate as kings who were corrupt and perverse. Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle was their 
guide in such matters: "High morals impede profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the 
depravity of the moneylender who there-by masters them and bends them to his will." However, when 
neither bribes nor blackmail can sway a king, then the well-tested basic characteristic of the merchant- 
moneylenders worked just as well - treason and subversion. 

In the third year of Lipit-Ishtar 's reign, an ambitious Semitic ruler named Gungunum (1932-1906 
BC) came to the throne of Larsa, to the southeast of Isin. With the financial backing of the tamkarum 


[merchant-moneylenders], he began to build up the political strength of the city with a series of military 
successes in the region of Elam and Anshan. It was from the east (Elam) that the greatest threat to their 
businesses would come. So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] needed a king who would defend 
their profits with pre-emptive strikes. Only a few years later, this same Gungunum gained control of Ur, 
the old imperial capital and sea-trade terminal that had meant so much to Isin's prestige and commercial 
power. To be sure, it was a "friendly" occupation. Ur was threatened by a new invasion of even more 
Amorites. And Gungunum was demonstrating that he was the protector of the merchant-moneylender's 
home port and temple of the Moon God and not Lipit-Ishtar. From then on, Isin and king Lipit-Ishtar 
and his moral laws ceased to be a significant political force. Isin held on to some of its former claims for 
another century or more but Larsa was now on the ascent. 

The reign of Gungunum at Larsa marked the beginning of the first Semitic Amorite dynasty in 
the south. After Gungunum occupied the old capital city of Ur, a group of Amorite-dominated city- 
states competed for dominance throughout Mesopotamia. Following the moneylenders' and merchants' 
strategy, the Amorites consolidated their power in the commercial centers such as Larsa, Eshnunna, 
and Babylon. But they ignored the prestigious Sumerian cities like Kish, Ur, and Uruk, where the richest 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds had long been firmly established. As urbanized Amorites 
rose to prominent positions in Mesopotamia, including kingship in independent states, the Sumerian 
language was no longer spoken. Akkadian became the language of daily life. [ 123 ] 

With the Amorite Gungunum (1932-1906 BC), the fortunes of Larsa improved. Notable among 
his achievements was the annexation from Isin of Ur, by which Larsa gained control of the valuable 
Persian Gulf trade which had apparently languished since the fall of Ur. Under the protection of 
Gungunum, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds of Ur had no fear of losing property or 
silver to the moral king Lipit-Ishtar of Isin. And once Lipit-Ishtar had lost the financial backing of the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds and the prestige of controlling many cities with their tax 
revenues, he became powerless and replaceable. 

That there was no open conflict between the two cities, however, can be seen in the traditions 
of the office of high priestess of the Moon God at Ur. Both the daughters of Ishme-Dagan and of Lipit- 
Ishtar of Isin had been made high priestesses of the Moon God. Both of them continued in office under 
Gungunum even after a usurper to the throne of Isin made dedications at Ur while that city was under 
the hegemony of Larsa. So, obviously worship of the gods transcended the politics of the Sumerian city- 
states even when they were ruled by Amorites. Gungunum claimed the titles both of "King of Sumer 
and Akkad" and "King of Ur". He and his successors did much to improve the political and economic 
standing of Larsa along with the economic standing of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 

One of the most interesting archives to have survived from this period tells of the revived sea- 
trade between Ur and Bahrain. The relevant documents date from the reigns of Gungunum and his two 
successors. They reveal an active trade carried out by a group of seafaring merchants with the aid of 
capital invested by various private citizens who didn't accept any of the risk involved but who received a 
fixed return of the profits. These private investors lived comfortably in Ur while their sea captains risked 
their lives on the open sea. Once again, the greedy tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] through their 
control of the trade routes and the throwing down of any laws regulating their activities, could demand 
high profits for minimal investments. (Over 140 years later, the Law Code of Hammurabi of Babylon 
attempted, unsuccessfully, to compel such investors to share not only the profits but the possible losses.) 

The main object of this Bahrain trade was copper, in the form of both ingots and finished 
products. Copper was imported in enormous quantities, on which the king made a tidy profit in 
import duties. Ivory, gold, lumps of lapis lazuli, beads of precious stones, "fish-eyes" (pearls) and other 
luxury items are also mentioned in the archives. In this trade Bahrain was the middle man, importing 
raw materials and commodities from such places as eastern Iran, Oman and India and trading to the 


seafaring merchants of the Isin-Larsa Dynasties for products such as cooking oil, grain and highly-prized 
woven garments. Making use of such distant trade depots and markets marks a noticeable change from 
the period of the Sargonid kings when ships of Oman and India actually tied up at the quays of Agade. 
But the merchant-moneylenders of the Isin-Larsa Period (2006-1884 BC) maintained a tight monopoly 
at both Ur and Larsa as the only off-loading ports between the sea-faring ships and the boats of the rivers. 
With this monopoly over all river traffic between the Persian Gulf and all of Mesopotamia, they increased 
their profits from the Sumerian Swindle upon the luckless populace. 

This change in tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] strategy was an indication of the 
international expansion of the merchant and moneylender guilds that were increasingly protective of 
their wealth and possessions. The importance of keeping their loot in de-centralized locations was one of 
the hard lessons many of them had learned during the various wars and confiscations of the kings. Even 
when they, themselves, had helped to start a war or had financed a war, they had learned how difficult it 
is to avoid losses when the war spills over to where their treasure was hidden. By maintaining their trade 
colonies and secret guilds in distant lands separated by oceans and deserts, they were more assured of 
avoiding economic losses from political or religious conflicts. It was during this changing time as the 
political power see-sawed between the Sumerians and the Semites of the north, that the Treasonous Class 
first began to establish themselves as a fully developed, international menace on the world stage. They 
had existed as an organized conspiracy since before the arrival of the Sumerians. But the uncertainties 
of the Isin-Larsa Period had forced them to better appreciate outlying depositories for their gold and 
silver bullion. With guilds established in Oman and India, they could always depend on a supply of silver 
during an emergency that was beyond the reach of any king. Even if a warring king stole their treasures, 
low interest or zero interest loans from the foreign tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds would put 
them back in business. 

One of the major concerns of the Larsa dynasties was water. Indeed to judge by the long 
succession of irrigation schemes mentioned in royal inscriptions and year-names of the period, 
procurement of water was of major concern. But Larsa's problems became unusually acute owing to the 
damming of its main canal by some unspecified enemy. In a coup d'etat, one Nur-Adad (1865-1850 BC), 
"one of the multitude", took control of Larsa and destroyed the offending dam. Growing conflict with Isin 
owed much to increasing shortages of water. Nur-Adad's son, Sin-iddinam (1849-1843 BC), was forced to 
resort to measures perhaps first taken by Entemena of Lagash (2404-2375 BC). The channel of the Tigris 
was deepened and "eternal and unceasing abundance of water" was brought to Larsa. [ 124 ] 

Isin was finally attacked and seized by Rim-Sin, the last ruler of Larsa, who attached so much 
importance to this conquest that he dated all documents throughout the last thirty years of his reign by 
this event. 

But Rim-Sin, himself, was unable to exploit his victory. To the north, in the previously 
unimportant city of Babylon, an outstanding Semitic ruler named Hammurabi came to prominence. 
After some three decades of a rather troubled rule, he attacked and defeated Rim-Sin of Larsa, as well as 
the kings of Elam, Mari, and Eshnunna, and thus, about 1750 BC, became the ruler of a united kingdom 
reaching from the Persian Gulf to the Habur River. With Hammurabi, the history of Sumeria comes to an 
end and the history of Babylonia, a Semitic state built on a Sumerian foundation, begins. [ 125 ] 

The two key dates for Sumerian chronology are the end of the Third Dynasty of Ur, when the 
Sumerians lost their predominant political position in Mesopotamia (2000 BC), and the beginning of 
the reign of Hammurabi of Babylon (1792 BC), when to all intents and purposes the Sumerians ceased 
to exist as a political, ethnic, and linguistic entity. [ 126 ] This period of squabbling city states and shifting 
alliances, where the last of the Sumerian civilization began to disappear and the Semitic Babylonian 
state began to rule the region, is known as the Old Babylonian Period (2000-1750 BC) because it is the 
beginnings of the rise of Babylon into world history. 


Strategically, as will be seen again and again throughout history, the driving force of political 
power is, namely, physical occupation. Political power comes from physical occupation: not historical 
rights, not title deeds, not moral rights - only occupation. 

The Sumerians trusted their gods and their leaders to protect them because this was the ancient 
and the moral way of high civilization, living lives devoted to the "straight path". But the kings and priests 
could not protect the People because behind everyone's backs, making deals with everyone's enemies, 
debauching families and stealing the wealth of the nation, were the moneylenders and merchants 
conspiring and negotiating for profits at whatever the cost to the People. Using cheap immigrant labor to 
undermine and under-employ the People and then defrauding them of their possessions while stirring 
up foreign armies against them, the moneylenders and merchants reaped huge profits while the civilized 
Sumerians were destroyed. However, this time, instead of rising again and continuing their ancient 
culture, the Sumerian People were dispossessed of their lands entirely. Their way of life was taken over 
by the Semitic Amorites. The Sumerians became muskenum [Have-Nots] in the lands that they had once 
ruled. As Sumeria and the Sumerian People fell, the parasitic moneylenders jumped like blood-sucking 
fleas onto a fresh and unsuspecting host. 

2000 to 1750 BC, Hammurabi and Babylon 

As we begin to study Babylonia, we find ourselves somewhere at the mid-point in the history of 
ancient Mesopotamia, not just a changing history in regard to kings and dates and places but a changing 
history in regard to the moral and spiritual and intellectual life of the People. And the change was not 

Under Sumerian genius, the region had grown to the highest level of civilization yet known in 
the world. For over a thousand years, the Sumerians had created a society that worked so effectively that 
very little change took place in all of that time and, except for Egypt, all of the people in the surrounding 
countries emulated and copied what the Sumerians had developed. This mid-point in the history of 
Mesopotamia also includes the earliest time frame for certain groups of wandering goat-rustlers and 
bandits who would later play a crucial and corrosive part in world history. These were the tribes of 
Semitic bandits who were later to weasel their way onto the world stage under the name of Hebrews. So, 
it is from this time frame that we begin to unravel from world history the earliest known tendrils of the 
diseased aberration of an organized, parasitic, criminal conspiracy which is known as Judaism. 

Counting the Ubaidian prehistory, Mesopotamian society had functioned smoothly for well over 
3,000 years of planting and harvesting, canal digging, city and temple building, raising their families and 
praying to their gods. Change was not necessary since Sumerian civilization provided everything that 
the Sumerian People could ever want. Their reed huts and mud houses provided adequate shelter. And 
since the reeds and mud were free, all that was required to own a house was their own labor to build it. 
Their herds provided meat, milk and wool. Fish were in the rivers and ponds; grain was in the fields; fruit 
was in the orchards. There was plenty of food. A workman's pay was about 10 liters (about 2.5 gallons) 
of barley per day. This was enough to feed him and a large family with enough left over to barter for 
vegetables, fish, garments and beer. And with barley selling for about 300 liters per shekel of silver, a 
workman could sell his surplus barley for silver and within a few years save enough to buy some farm 
land. With his own farm, he was automatically counted among the awilum [the haves] and his higher 
social status became an additional benefit of working hard and saving much. This is how natural living 
allowed the Sumerians to thrive and to prosper. Through their protective kings, their wise priests and 
service to their gods, they had created a society filled with plenty of everything for everybody. 

But independent farmers did not benefit the ruthless and greedy moneylenders who parasitically 
lived on the wealth that they sucked away from the unfortunate and from the distressed. Independent 


farmers who were wealthy enough to never need a loan, did not give the moneylenders the lucre they 
desired. It was only from the farmers who fell into difficulties and whose only hope of escaping starvation 
was to borrow from the moneylenders, could a profit be made. And so, as the centuries progressed, the 
moneylenders learned that their profits increased in direct proportion to an increase in the suffering 
of the People. Secret Fraud #11 became their strategy for moneylender success: "Dispossessing the 
People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people 
are impoverished." The moneylenders, fat in their bellies, wearing the best in fine clothes, drinking the 
best in wines and beers and enjoying perverted debauchery among their sex slaves, sought only to bring 
themselves the highest profits. And since there were both Sumerian as well as Amorite moneylenders, 
it only took advantageous marriages to cement the two ethnic groups into a single conspiring organism 
that spanned the borders of the city-states and connected the dots of guild halls stretching from the 
Mediterranean to Oman and India. 

The question that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] asked themselves during their guild 
meetings and their banquets in secret meeting places was this: How can the People be brought to the 
most suffering in a way where they are happy and eager to borrow from the moneylenders? This might 
seem like an odd question. But as the moneylenders had learned to their great loss and woe, the People 
hated them. And that hatred always got in the way of profits and it put them into personal danger. 
But when that hatred for being cheated and swindled is overcome by a fearful desperation, when the 
impoverished borrower is frantic from starvation or fearful of losing his farm or his children as debt- 
slaves; then such borrowers smile, bows his head with subservient respect and treats the moneylenders 
with reverence and feigned happiness. 

Thus, the scheming merchant-moneylenders found that although the People would never love 
them, at least the moneylenders could get the gratitude and respect that they craved if the people feared 
them. Even when the People hated them with burning fury, the moneylenders learned that they could 
demand gratitude and respect from the People just so long as the People needed them. With this in 
mind, the moneylenders conspired to always create conditions of need. Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian 
Swindle gave the moneylenders profits from the extreme neediness of the People as they took advantage 
of the poor by causing them to lose whatever property that they had. Following the Secret Frauds of 
money lending, the bankers were thus able to acquire the wealth of the People by enslaving, dispossessing 
and destroying them. 

In this way, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] conspired to create hunger and poverty 
and suffering among the People so that the People, in extreme desperation, would then turn in gratitude 
to them to relieve that suffering through loans-at-interest. And who else could give loans other than 
the moneylenders? Thus, through ruthless subversion on the one hand and perfidious offers of loans- 
at-interest on the other hand, the merchant-moneylenders gained the fruits of Secret Fraud #14 of the 
Sumerian Swindle: "Anyone who is allowed to lend-at-interest eventually owns the entire world." 

However - and this was absolutely and vitally important - whatever sufferings that the People 
were manipulated into receiving could not also be seen as coming from the moneylenders whose services 
the People must be coaxed into accepting. The Sumerian Swindle had to be accomplished in secret and 
without any apparent cause pointing to the conspiring moneylenders. Society can operate quite smoothly 
without interest-bearing loans. But for the moneylenders, no loans equal no profits. So, keeping the 
People poor, ignorant, and in distress created wealth for the moneylenders in those ancient times, just 
as it does for the bankers in modern times. But such social manipulation can only be successful with the 
most secret of plans and the tightest security because if the People ever learned of the real source of their 
miserable poverty, they would rise up and kill all of the bankers, financiers and merchants or, at the very 
least, beat them and take back their stolen property. 

Even though the various cities and lands of ancient Mesopotamia were ruled by kings of city- 


states and tribal chiefs of villages scattered between the Mediterranean Sea across the Persian Gulf to 
India, all of these kings and people did business with silver as the basic unit of measure. Barter was the 
basic method of commerce among both rich and poor and silver was the basic measure of value. All 
goods and services were valued in relation to a weighed amount of silver. Silver, in barleycorn weights or 
grains (-0.05 grams) or shekel weights (~ 8 grams) or mina weights (-500 grams) or talent weights (-30 
kilograms), could be traded across the ancient Near East for any product or any service. If two merchants 
did not have silver, they could still barter their goods by first valuing each trade good at its worth in 
silver and then making a trade of their goods in ratio to those silver valuations. From the Persian Gulf to 
the Mediterranean Sea, from Arabia to the Mountains of Capadocia, the shekel- weight of silver was the 
standard in monetary transactions that spanned all languages and cultures for over 3,000 years right up 
to the days of Jesus Christ. 

The moneylenders and their meticulous scribes could calculate the relative wealth and strength 
of all of the countries around them, down to the tiniest barleycorn- weight in silver. They could calculate 
on their moist-clay accounting tablets the value and the manpower of every city. With this secret money 
power, the moneylenders were in the position of knowing which kings were strong and which kings were 
weak, who could afford the best armaments and who needed loans to get them. 

In this Bronze Age, the armaments industry was not complicated. Yet, it was as secretly controlled 
and as carefully guarded as it is today. Since a bronze dagger can kill an enemy just as dead as can an 
atomic bomb, the manufacture of bronze weapons was a state monopoly controlled by the king and 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds. Although melting bronze and pouring it into molds 
to make swords and arrow heads might seem like a simple affair, it did require the skill and knowledge 
of the metal workers guilds who knew the secrets of smelting and alloy which they did not share with 
anyone not of their trade guild. Thus, weapons manufacture was a state controlled monopoly just as it is 
today. The king wanted military control through weapons manufacture. But the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] wanted profits from arms sales, from copper and tin import sales, and from war, itself. 
Although anyone could buy a sword who could afford one, the big money was in arming entire armies. 

As the Third Dynasty of Ur fell and with it the Sumerian Peoples' reliance upon God, the tribes of 
Semitic Amorites dispossessed the Sumerians of their lands and usurped political control of their cities. 
Changes in society occurred that are still being felt in our modern world today more than four thousand 
years later. Materialistic, acquisitive greed began to increase in power as spiritual knowledge decreased. 
The Sumerian ideas of social harmony through a godly life, began to give way to the Semitic ideas of 
social control through property ownership. Under the Amorites, the awilum [the Haves] increased their 
wealth and gained State-enforced protection while the muskenum [the Have-Nots] became ever more 
impoverished and enslaved. 

As the tribes of Semites took over Sumerian society, the true knowledge of God and of spiritual 
well-being began to disappear. The People no longer served their gods as their primary goal in Life but 
they were forced to serve the moneylenders and kings in a desperate bid to sustain their hungry and 
increasingly poor families. With over a thousand years of a relatively peaceful existence, the Sumerians 
had had first-hand experience with such things as the realization of God-consciousness in the temple 
meditation halls. They had experienced the living holy spirit as a surrounding and protective aura. This 
holy spirit radiated as halos and beams of light emanating from their high priests, priestesses, kings 
and mighty warriors. This holy knowledge, because it is of a secret nature, was not taught to the Semitic 
Amorite interlopers. Wealth and political power was all that the Semites were interested in having, not 
spiritual knowledge. 

Yes, the Amorites learned the material and obvious elements of Sumerian society such as reading 
and writing, administration, farming and general culture. And they learned the outer manifestations 
of religion such as servicing the idols and celebrating the festivals. But the secret religious and spiritual 


knowledge that was only passed along to trusted disciples, they did not learn. So, it began to disappear. 
This is seen in the disappearance in the use of the swastika. This holy symbol, much revered by the 
Sumerians, [see Volume II] was unknown to the invading Semitic gangs of goat rustlers and bandits. 
Knowledge of the spiritual power as represented by the swastika and by the Maltese Cross completely 
disappeared as the Semites took over Sumeria and the empires of Babylonia and Assyria began to arise. 
Those Semitic empires, backed by the moneylenders, were based on commerce and warfare. They were 
not based strictly upon serving the gods as had been practiced by the Sumerians. 

A loss in the knowledge of the horned "helmet" can also be seen in the religious art work of 
the Babylonians and the later Assyrians. [ Figure 9 1 Most archeologist assume that this helmet, as seen 
being worn by the various Sumerian gods in the carvings and cylinder seals, was just a "symbol" of a 
god since it is worn in all drawings and carvings of the Sumerian deities. Although this assumption of its 
symbolic quality is basically true, the horned helmet was also an indication of the spiritual levels of those 
wearing it. The helmet was not a "helmet" per se. That is, it was not a piece of head gear. It was, rather, a 
manifestation of holy spirit. It was a symbolic representation of the holy spirit radiating from the head 
of the god as well as the spiritual knowledge of the religious seeker. The "horns" are levels of muscular 
dynamic energy surrounding the head of a spiritual person. Those "horns of power" were not seen so 
much as they were felt. Anyone who reaches a high spiritual level can experience the "horned helmet" 

The horned helmet, the swastika, the "Maltese" cross, the sun disk, as well as the caduceus 
serpent-and-staff representing the spiritual knowledge of the physician, all disappeared. Although 
these symbols represented the spiritual knowledge of the Sumerians, the actual knowledge was not 
passed along to the culture that was created by the scheming moneylenders. The tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] took over the Sumerian Culture and dispossessed the Sumerian People of their material 
possessions but the secret knowledge of God remained hidden from them. They had gold but not God. 

Of what use were the secrets of Sumerian religion to the moneylenders? As long as they donated 
to the temples and made a show of serving the gods, they were free to swindle the People and to reap 
the profits. The moneylenders had learned how to solidify their grip on Society while hiding behind the 
kings and ministers. They had learned how to create war in order to profit from other people's losses. And 
they had learned how to use foreign troops as their enforcers. Foreign soldiers do not have the brotherly 
empathy for the people whom they police and against whom they are willing to commit any atrocity. And 
they are willing to follow any order given by those who pay their salaries. 

Two symbols that are falsely claimed by the lying Jews to be Jewish symbols can be traced back 
to the religious art of ancient Mesopotamia. These are the mennorah, or ritual lamp, and what the Jews 
call the Star of David or the Seal of Solomon. Both of these occur together on an Old Assyrian seal of the 
early second millennium BC, long before there were any Jews in the world. [ 127 ] 

As the moneylenders gained power, the status of women began to break down. Sumerian women 
had had basic rights and a high social status on equality with men in most cases. [ Figure 10 1 ■ But under 
the power of the Semitic moneylenders, women became personal property and trade goods and whores. 
Doing business "just as it had always been", the moneylenders seized the wives and daughters of debtors 
as payment for debts. As the moneylenders abused, beat, raped and reduced them to prostitution and 
servitude in order to payback the loan-at-interest swindles, the status of women and the respect that they 
had enjoyed, disappeared. Women became the moneylenders' best cattle. 

In early Sumerian religion, a prominent position had been occupied by many goddesses who 
were consorts to particular gods. But as the merchant-moneylenders gained more and more women as 
their personal property, that is, as the Semites gained control and the Sumerians were disenfranchised, 
all of the Sumerian goddesses disappeared except for the Semitic goddess Ishtar, the goddess of love and 
prostitutes and warfare. 


The Sumerian underworld, itself, was originally under the sole rule of a goddess. A myth explains 
how she came to take a consort; and goddesses played a part in the divine decision-making Assembly of 
the Gods in the Sumerian myths. There is even a strong suggestion that polyandry may at one time have 
been practiced because the Sumerian reforms of Urukagina refer to women who had taken more than 
one husband. [ 128 ] But in general, as the wealth and power of the moneylenders increased, the poverty 
and degradation of women also increased because they became slaves, commodities and the play things 
for drunks in the taverns. Defrauded by the moneylenders of their lands, their husbands, and their 
children, they became prostitutes trading tricks for a bowl of barley gruel and a sipping straw in a beer 
vat. [ Figure 11 1 

As previously stated, the Third Dynasty of Ur was destroyed and Sumerian control dwindled. 
Amorite dynasties arose in other cities, the two most prominent at first being Isin and Larsa. For this 
reason, the century or so after the overthrow of Ur is known as the Isin-Larsa period (2006-1894 
BC). The Larsa dynasty gradually increased its influence at the expense of Isin, but was finally itself 
overthrown (1763 BC) by the sixth ruler of the Dynasty of Babylon, the great Hammurabi (1792-1750 

From that time, none of the new rulers in the Sumerian cities were Sumerians. They were the 
Semitic Amorite sons of the wandering goat herders and sheep rustlers who had been infiltrating 
Mesopotamia ever since the Sumerian moneylenders had first hired them to replace the swindled and 
dispossessed Sumeria farmers. Similar to the modern day illegal aliens and foreign workers who infest 
Europe, America and Australia, within a single generation their sons and daughters spoke perfect 
Sumerian as well as Amorite. And with the help of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] , they 
learned how to take over everything that the Sumerians had built - everything except the spiritual 
knowledge of True Religion, something for which the merchant-moneylenders had no use since they had 
not yet learned how to make religion produce a profit for themselves. 

Finally, in 1894 BC, bringing to an end the Isin-Larsa Period, an Amorite dynasty was founded 
at Babylon which was to bring that city to a pre-eminence that it maintained, psychologically if not 
politically, for an additional 2000 years. Up to this time, the rather small city of Babylon had made no 
mark on Mesopotamian history. Yet in a little over 100 more years, this city ruled all of Mesopotamia, 
albeit briefly, and subsequently it was to give its name, Babylonia, to the entire region of Sumer and 

The language written on the cuneiform documents of this time, and presumably spoken by 
the majority of the population, is known to modern scholars as Babylonian, or more specifically, Old 
Babylonian, to distinguish it from later dialects. Archaeologists refer to the period from the fall of Ur (~ 
2000 BC) to the Hittite sack of Babylon in 1595 BC as the Old Babylonian period. Babylonian was not 
a new language but simply a later form of Semitic Akkadian. That dialect from the time of Sargon and 
the Agade kings, is specifically designated Old Akkadian to differentiate it from later Babylonian forms. 
It was spoken by the same Amorite goat rustlers speaking two different dialects of the same Semitic 

The existence of the town of Babylon, itself, can be traced back to the latter part of the Early 
Dynastic period. By the time of the Agade king, Shar-kali-sharri (-2150 BC), this small town of Babylon 
boasted at least two temples. Later, under the kings of Ur, Babylon was of sufficient importance to be 
the seat of a local governor. The name, Babylon, was first found in the Akkadian form, Babilim and 
later in the biblical form, Babel or Bab-El, meaning the "gate of god", and much later - through Greek 
transliteration - as Babylon. [ 129 ] 

Please take note of the use of the name, "El". In this example, the ancient Semitic name of God, 
"El", was in use at this early time, long before there were any Jews to utter it with a guttural "H" sound. 

The First Dynasty of Babylon (1894-1595 BC) is rightly thought of, particularly during the reign 


of Hammurabi, as one of the highlights of ancient civilization. It was an age of material prosperity, and 
it is also one of the periods about which we are best informed. There are not only many thousands of 
business documents and letters from Babylon and other cities, but we also have the collection of laws 
promulgated by Hammurabi himself. Together, these documents make it clear that the pre-eminence 
of Hammurabi among his contemporaries, which enabled him to raise Babylon to a cultural supremacy 
which it was never to lose, was not due solely to his military ability. His success also owed much to his 
political insight and aptitude for diplomacy, and to his administrative ability and concern for social 
justice throughout his land. 

But it would be a mistake to think of Babylon as the only city-state of significance at this period. 
Farther north there was the kingdom of Assyria, where another prince of Amorite origin, Shamshi- Adad 
I, an older contemporary of Hammurabi, established himself as king in 1814 BC. He exerted considerable 
influence upon the regions to the south and south-west. In the early part of his reign, Hammurabi had 
another powerful contemporary in the King of Eshnunna, who controlled the cities along the Diyala 
River and in the neighbourhood of modern Baghdad. There were also other Amorite centers of power in 
North Syria. The situation is summed up in a cuneiform letter from this period which says: 

"There is no king who of himself alone is strongest. Ten or fifteen kings follow Hammurabi 
of Babylon, the same number follow Rim-Sin of Larsa, the same number follow Ibal-pi-El of 
Eshnunna, the same number follow Amut-pi-El of Qatanurn [in Syria], and twenty kings follow 
Yarim-Lim of Yamkhad [Aleppo in North Syria]." [ : 


First of all, note should be taken here that these kings were all Semitic Amorites and not 
Sumerians. Also note once again that the names of God were often part of the personal names of the 
people and of the various kings, not only of Sumeria but of the later dynasties throughout the ancient 
Near East as well. Once again remember, all of the ancient people believed in the gods and often named 
their children with a name of god as a part of their personal names. This was both a dedication of a child 
by a parent to a god as well as a God-Name-protection of the child by both parent and god. These two 
kings, Ibal-pi-El and Amut-pi-El, were using the Semitic names of the god, El, more than one thousand 
three hundred years before there were any Jews in existence. In addition, please note that even before 
there were any Jews, the Amorite tribe of Binu-Yamina (Benjamin) was a well-known ally to some of the 
moneylenders of Mesopotamia. In other words, more than a thousand years before there were any Jews, 
the tribe of Benjamin was serving the moneylenders of Babylonia. 

As Semites, all of the kings of Mesopotamia were all related to one another through their tribal 
affiliations. This is very much overlooked by modern historians and archeologists that these people 
could call upon their tribal and family relationships as a means of bonding distant tribes through their 
bloodlines to give them a method for infiltrating other peoples while keeping a cohesive unity among 
themselves. Thus, among these Semitic goat rustlers, the kings were related to their subjects by genealogy. 
So, it is of benefit to take a quick look at this genealogy swindle. 

The wandering tribes of goat rustlers, not having specific cities or a specific place to give them 
social cohesion, developed the genealogy of their bloodlines as a basis of social stability. The wandering 
Amorite bandits and goat herders in those days, like the Bedouins of modern times, did not place a great 
emphasis on the individual. After all, they worked in gangs and tribes so the group took precedence over 
the individuals within that group. This is standard gang mentality. In fact, blood ties serve to link people 
to the past and bind them in the present. Members of those early desert tribes could trace their lineage 
back with genealogy. The blood-ties with long-dead ancestors formed an important part of their personal 
identity, at least in their own minds. 

Knowing who their fathers were was even more important among these wandering goat herders 


since polygamy was the rule and not the exception. While the Sumerians usually were monogamous, 
the Semitic Amorites were polygamous. A wealthy Sumerian might take a second wife but a wandering 
Amorite could have any number of wives depending upon the size of his herds of goats and sheep to 
sustain them. Numerous wives produced numerous children and so the Semite population increased 
"like the sands of the sea" in comparison to the generally monogamous Sumerians. Substansively the 
Sumerians practiced a kind of natural birth control by nursing their babies for two or three years. [ 131 ] 
Women do not ovulate and are relatively infertile while nursing a child. So, children can be born at two- 
year intervals while the mother can still maintain an enthusiastic sex life without becoming pregnant 
until after the child is weaned. 

The Amorites with their many wives and numerous children quickly became the dominant 
population wherever they settled. Numerous children was one method that they used for dispossessing 
the Sumerians simply by out-breeding them. Like the modern day promiscuous Mexicans, Pakistanis, 
Chinese and Indians who are encouraged by the modern day bankers to settle in a birth-controlled 
America and Europe, the promiscuous Semites of the ancient Near East quickly over- ran the original 
population of Sumeria both by sheer numbers, as well as by their Semitic subversion and sneakiness. 

Again, occupation is the driving force of political power. The Amorites did not need large armies 
to overrun Mesopotamia. All that was required was as many children as possible and the treasonous 
moneylenders inviting them all in. That, and the ability to amalgamate dispersed tribes into large forces 
through genealogical allegiances, gave the Amorites the ability to launch quick raids with relatively large 
forces and then run away and hide in a guerilla warfare dispersal of forces. 

For these reasons, from the safety of their city walls, the Amorite Dynasties which took control 
of the Mesopotamian cities, kept a wary eye on the roving gangs of goat rustlers. They knew the tricks 
of the Semites simply because they were all from the same Semitic stock. They had won those city walls 
because they knew how to infiltrate, out -breed, and take over an agrarian society. And they didn't want 
the wandering tribes to use the same tactic on them. So, they guarded their city walls and defended their 
farms from their relatives, the voracious goat-rustlers of the ancient Near East. 

The ancient peoples did not have the false, modern, Jewish-Communist concepts of genetics as a 
way confusing and down-breeding themselves. They had common good sense and could see with their 
own eyes the effects of breeding and of bloodlines. Breed a black goat and a white goat and the issue 
will be spotted goats and shades of gray. They knew of the same principles when applied to the marriage 
of daughters and sons. And they were careful to choose wisely in their marriage mates by taking into 
consideration the health, intelligence, character, social standing and wealth of prospective marriage 
partners for their children. After all, they wanted intelligent and heroic sons and strong daughters, not 
half-wits and weaklings. So, they prided themselves in their good breeding. 

The Amorites and Semitic goat-rustlers observed that intelligence, health, beauty, strength, and a 
variety of other physical traits are passed down through breeding. But oddly enough, they believed that 
a "special something" other than genetics was passed along in the genealogies. That "special something" 
is actually, upon inspection, quite ridiculous. Certainly, they were wrong about the earth being flat. They 
were equally wrong about a certain aspect of genealogy, the error of which is still being perpetuated today 
by the Semitic Arabs and the perfidious Jews. 

To understand that "special something," consider your own family genealogy. If you had a relative 
who lived 200 years ago who performed some heroic act or who was noted as a being a saint, would you 
therefore consider yourself as brave or saintly simply because you are his descendant? Probably not. No 
sane person would do any more than concede the characteristics of a long dead relative as his alone and 
be proud that he was related. 

But just as in traditional Bedouin society today, the Semitic Amorites believed that their ancient 
relatives passed down to them not only genetic features such as intelligence and hair color but their acts 


of piety or deviltry as well. The way one relative acted in the ancient past was claimed to be inherited by 
the entire tribe. 

For example, the foundation of honor in the roaming bands of goat-herder society then as 
now, was based on what their ancestors did. Whatever honor or virtue or great deeds attained by their 
ancestors, was claimed as an honor or virtue or great deed for each of the individual goat-rustlers. Like 
any physical trait that could be passed down through genetics, the goat-rustlers believed that such traits 
as virtue, honor, bravery, or holiness could also be passed down to one's descendants as well as the reverse 
and negative of these virtues. This was not a type of karma where individuals inherit their own good or 
bad deeds from a previous life. No, their relatives were dead and gone. What those Semites believed was 
that they inherited their dead relatives' good or bad deeds which were passed along through the family 
line just like the numbers of their fingers and toes were inherited. 

This weird idea was called asl (meaning, "ancestry/origin/nobility"), a term expressive of a range 
of fraudulent modern beliefs. Drawing upon the genealogical notion of inheriting a pure and illustrious 
bloodline, the idea behind asl implies that moral character is passed on from one's ancestors. Thus, asl 
[pronounced "ass-hole"] is the primary metaphor for virtue and honor among the Semites. And the 
virtue and honor of wandering, goat-herding, bandit societies also included such things as admirable 
stealth and deceit, skills in cheating and lying, and success in raids upon farmers and weaker tribes. All 
of these characteristics brought food and wealth to the bandit tribe and thus were valuable assets for 
survival. Around a campfire at night, goat rustlers telling tales of their successful raids and burglaries 
upon farming villages as the whole tribe feasted on the roasting morsels of goat and lamb from their 
booty, would certainly become admired and envied ancestors to brag about in one's tribal genealogy. 

But such a genealogically-based concept of genetics produces a completely false concept of 
history, a false concept of history that is still practiced by the Bedouins, Muslims and the Jews of today. 
Bragging about a great-great-grandfather who had stolen a herd of goats or who had gotten chased out of 
a storehouse in Egypt, became an exercise in self-delusion and deceit as these Semites bragged about their 
asl . No longer would the stories told around the campfire be "a thousand years ago, our ancient ancestor 
out-foxed an Egyptian"; no longer would the stories be "an ancestor of our tribe out-foxed the Egyptians"; 
no longer would the stories be "our tribe out-foxed the Egyptians"; but the stories around the campfires 
became "we out-foxed the Egyptians". 

Through the genealogical concept of asl, the Semitic gangs claimed that a virtue by an ancient 
relative was a virtue inherited by every member of the tribe. And because it was something that they 
inherited, then it was as permanent an inheritance as hair color or skin tones. That is, each tribe member 
could claim "because a relative 2,000 years ago was a good man, then that means that I have inherited his 
goodness and that I am also a good man even when I roll drunks for their silver and steal the neighbor's 
sheep because I inherited my ancient ancestor's asl." It is a false concept but it was believed by the 
Amorite goat-rustlers and by today's Bedouins and Muslims and by today's Jews. 

Through this delusion, the ancient Semitic goat-rustlers achieved a miracle! Time travel! By 
identifying the past with a genealogical connection, they could transform themselves into the exact 
bodies of their ancestors! Time no longer had any power over them. No longer did they speak of an 
ancient ancestor in the past tense. What a relative did a thousand years ago was the same as if the story- 
teller did it, himself, just yesterday. And it was all accomplished through genealogical transmogrification! 
Goat rustlers, dreaming dreams of greatness and grinning at the thought that they were just as wonderful 
as their mythological ancestors whose stories they told around a campfire made of cattle dung! Or in 
modern times, telling the Passover Fable over matzo balls. 

In the tribal gangs, each individual in a tribe is related to every other member through careful 
memorization and discussion of their genealogy. If there were great leaders or heroes in one's own 
genealogy then that was assumed to be a glory to one's own self. So, a lot of pride was taken by the goat- 


herders and camel drivers of the Middle East in their genealogies. Anyone living in those societies who 
could not recite a genealogy implied that he had a lesser moral worth. And this moral worth, like the 
colors of the goats that they bred, was accepted as reflecting down through everyone in that bloodline. 

In the same way, individuals of an inferior bloodline who were recognized as having noble 
qualities and moral qualities associated with asl, then their character was always explained away as having 
some bloodline from a superior family line - perhaps from a maternal uncle or grandfather. Among the 
goat-rustlers, morality and character were believed to be an inheritable part of one's genealogy. [ 132 ] 

This idea that great glories and moral attributes of an ancestor were passed down to one's own 
individual self, became an important part of the Semitic mythology. With asl as a foundation, even 
the crudest, greediest, most rapacious moneylender could claim moral superiority merely by alleging 
the existence of a long dead ancestor who had had a reputation for virtue. Present loathsomeness and 
psychopathic evil could be instantly erased by calling up ancient virtues from long-dead ancestors. 
Genealogies among the Semites became a "get out of jail free card" just as long as they could brag about 
an alleged hero in their ancient past. Modern Jews are experts at such deceit and self-delusion, forgiving 
themselves of incredible atrocities under the cover of an alleged virtue by a primeval Moses or Abraham. 
That is, they are all virtuous saints because of Abraham's asl. Or claiming that every Jew is worthy of pity 
because the Nazis allegedly treated a few of them with scorn, is a claim based upon their Jewish asl. 

There is one more thing to know about the false ideas preserved in goat-herder imaginations and 
genealogies. A genealogy is as rigid a framework and as fixed and final a grouping as can be imagined. 
From their young boys to their old men, the modern day wandering Bedouins are expert genealogists; 
and the names of ancestors, for one reason or another, are never far from their lips. Names are kept 
alive by constant use, since all references to inter-group relationships must be in terms of these names. 
More than this, the Bedouins are proud to the point of boastfulness of their genealogical knowledge. 
But this knowledge tends to become vague and foggy at about the third generation until at about the 
fifth generation their genealogies get lost and become vague and mythological. [ 133 ] In other words, the 
genealogy of the wandering goat herders is only useful to them as far back as the fifth generation - at 
which point their memories fail and the trackless, timeless deserts give any farther remembrance of 
distant relatives a futility not worth the mention. 

But among some of the goat-rustler tribes, the technology of writing gave their genealogies longer 
branches into the mythical past. Not only were the fables connected through genealogy to living relatives 
but both the genealogies and the fables were written down on real goat skins, so they had to also be real 
and true! The more the goat-rustlers told the ancient myths and fables about long dead relatives, using 
fact and fiction and theatrical talent around a blazing fire at night, the greater their personal prestige grew 
- at least in their own minds. Because the most incredible tales could never be refuted by anyone living, 
then even the most impossible stories could be told, embellished and retold until all origins of the most 
fantastically incredible myths were lost. 

The origins of fabulous fables were lost, that is, except for the genealogy that connected them to 
the living tribe. Because the genealogical lines ended with real people whom everybody knew, then the 
entire genealogical tree was accepted as true as well as the mythological stories since its branches were 
connected to living relatives. So, as a part of this Semitic delusion, the genealogy, itself, became accepted 
as a "proof" that the stories were true! Once the genealogy was accepted as true, then the myths and 
fables were also accepted as true since they are connected to a genealogy that led from the distant past 
right up to the very tribesman who held the genealogy scrolls in his hands and read the ancient lies as 
if he had actually been there, himself. It's totally ridiculous but what else can be expected from illiterate 
goat rustlers of 2000 BC telling tales around a campfire of blazing cow patties? 

As the Amorite goat rustlers became civilized members of the emerging Amorite kingdoms, and 
as they learned how to read and write, they began to record their genealogies stretching back farther 


than the mere five generations usually allowed by human memory Through their crude sophistry of 
claiming that great merit and wondrous virtue are passed down from distant relatives to even the most 
flea-bitten member of the tribe, the goat-rustlers began to assume a ridiculously overbearing pride in the 
storied virtue of those ancestors. With the false concept of asl, the goat-rustlers could claim great deeds 
and virtues as personal attributes of their very own, identical to those of fabled and mythical ancestors. 
With a famous and dead ancestor in their genealogy, every thieving knave could claim to actually be as 
virtuous as a saint through the simple process of genealogical osmosis! 

But what would the musings of Amorite goat-rustlers telling tales around the flickering shadows 
of their campfires of 2000 BC have to do with the kings of the ancient Near East? Because the kings 
who had taken over the rulership of the Sumerian culture were all Amorites, they were all related to the 
various tribes that infested those dry and desolate lands. On the one hand, the various kings - the alleged 
servants of the gods - had the political baggage derived from a humble origin to overcome. That is, they 
were descended from goat rustlers and bandits instead of from noble kings and servants of the gods. And 
everybody, both Amorite and Sumerian, knew it. 

On the other hand, once the Amorites began to insinuate themselves into kingship, some tribes of 
bandits and goat-herders thus acquired an Amorite king in their genealogy with whom they could take 
pride and bask in his glory as it was passed down to them through the asl of their genealogical fantasies. 
As you shall see, this delusional pride in the genealogy of the bandit tribes became one of the unifying 
powers of the Babylonian moneylenders over all of the ancient Near East. Like the Sumerian Swindle 
designed to take more than they lend, the gloriously embellished genealogy of the scruffy goat rustlers 
of Mesopotamia, brought more glory to those religiously destitute people than they had ever had in fact. 
While picking off fleas from their shaggy beards, swatting at the flies buzzing around their grimy heads 
soiled with goat dung and bragging about the glories of their mythical ancestors, these Semitic goat 
rustlers and wandering Amorite bandits, swooning n the heat of a desert mirage, invented prestigious 
fantasies and considered themselves the better for it. After all, a dirty goat-rustler riding into town on 
his donkey might just find a better bench at the tavern and maybe a free beer if he made it known that 
he was related to some famous king or pious saint through no-matter-how-complicated a genealogical 
recitation from his furious memory. 

The Jews use this same fraud today, claiming that they are each born with the asl of rich and 
powerful and famous ancestors simply because it is their "inheritance". Even the Khazar and Ashkenazi 
Jews who have next to zero genetic relationship with the Jews of the Bible, claim that the asl of Abraham 
is their very own asl. They want you to believe that all Jews have inherited Abraham's asl. 

The Old Babylonian Period: Transition from Sumerian to Semite 

Most histories regard the lives of the kings and their accomplishments to be of utmost 
importance. But for this history, it is the effects that these kings had upon their subjects and upon the 
surrounding peoples that are the most important. After all, a king is but one man. But this one man 
affects the lives of many. So, let's take just a short look at the kings but be more concerned with what they 

The first few years of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) cannot have been encouraging because he 
was surrounded with powerful kings in the major cities. The powerful king Rim-Sin (1822-1763 BC) 
dominated the south. The kingdom of Eshnunna controlled the region just to the north of Babylon as far 
as the Euphrates. In the far north, Assyria under the astute Shamshi-Adad was a growing power already 
in control of vast territories. 

Rim-Sin's family is of some interest: his elder brother Warad-Sin (1834-1823 BC) was maneuvered 
to the throne of Larsa by their father, Kudur-mabuk, a clever tribal sheikh. Kudur-mabuk's name and that 


of his father are Elamite, yet Kudur-mabuk bore the titles "Shaikh of the Amurrum [Amorites] and of 
Yamutbal". Yamutbal was an area east of the Tigris settled by Amorites at the time of the Third Dynasty 
of Ur. So, he was an Amorite whose family had at some time entered the service of the king of Elam. His 
sons' names, however, are pure Semitic Akkadian. 

Rim-Sin's daughter was consecrated high priestess of the Moon God at Ur under the Sumerian 
name Enanedu. Indeed we see here the best-documented example of the path from goat-rustling nomad 
to Mesopotamian monarch. All accomplished within two generations! Once again note the importance 
of the Moon God of Ur; he was the god of the moneylenders in the city where the sea routes and river 
routes converged. 

Like the Isin and Ur kings, Rim-Sin was worshipped with divine honors. His rival, Hammurabi, 
never assumed the title of divinity in any form. And all subsequent kings were to follow Babylon in this 
respect as the Semitic Amorites completely infiltrated, subverted and overran all of Sumer and Akkad. 

Hammurabi's first few years seem to have been devoted to matters of internal administration. 
In his second year he "established justice in the land", a reference to the inauguration of reforms that 
culminated in the promulgation of his famous code of laws. After all, with the Sumerian Swindle of the 
moneylenders being allowed to rob the People of their wealth, it was a popular political move for the 
kings to free the people from indebtedness and slavery by "establishing justice in the land". That is, it was 
popular with everyone except the moneylenders. 

During Hammurabi's first 30 years only three year-names record military campaigns, and it was 
not until the latter part of his reign that Babylon became a major power. Undoubtedly the dominant 
personality of the age was Shamshi-Adad (-1813-1781 BC), king of the region to the north of Babylon 
that would become the future Assyria. 

Shamshi-Adad was a ruler of great military and administrative ability. His forceful personality is 
intimately revealed in letters found among some 13,000 cuneiform documents recovered from the royal 
palace at Mari. The city of Mari, as you might recall, was an important way station since ancient times 
for Sumerian caravan and boat traffic along the Euphrates. And it was a major manufacturing center for 
copper and bronze implements and weapons. In 1796 BC, Shamshi-Adad, taking advantage of a palace 
revolution in Mari, placed his simple-minded son Yasmakh-Adad on the throne of Mari as his sub-king 
and representative. 

Although Shamshi-Adad was a Semitic Amorite, like the other Amorites who began taking over 
the Sumerian cities and Sumerian culture, he prayed to the Sumerian gods. In one inscription, he boasts: 
"When I built the temple of my Lord Enlil, the prices in my city of Ashur were two gur of grain for a 
shekel of silver (about 600 liters of grain for a shekel of silver), fifteen minas of wool for a shekel of silver 
(about 8 kilos per shekel of silver). [ 134 ] Thus, he is stating that under his rule, prices were cheap and the 
People were well fed, fully clothed and prosperous. 

An older and more capable son, Ishme-Dagan, was placed as governor at Ekallatum, an 
administrative center east of the Tigris River above Ashur. Shamshi-Adad, himself, ruled from two 
capitals, Ashur and Shubat-Enlil in northeastern Syria where an administrative archive from his time has 
been found. The Mari archive covers the period from about 1810 to 1760 BC, and provides a day-to-day 
view of contemporary events unequalled in the ancient world. The family correspondence of Shamshi- 
Adad and his sons is particularly revealing of the politics of the time and includes some of the most 
touchingly human documents recovered from the ancient world. [ 135 ] 

From his capital at Shubat-Enlil, Shamshi-Adad could rule the Khabur valley while watching his 
sons. Thus, the whole area between the middle Tigris and the middle Euphrates and northward into the 
mountains was consolidated under a single Amorite family by about 1800 BC. [ 136 ] Just as the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] families controlled large business enterprises, it should be emphasized that a_ 
rather huge territory of Mesopotamia was controlled by a single Amorite family that of Shamshi-Adad 


and his sons. The Semitic kings and crown princes, working as family groups, would most certainly have 
also assigned their variety of kith and kin to the various political positions below them, not just sons 
but uncles, nephews and trusted members of the extended family as their genealogical tribal and family 
relationships gave them a covert chain of command along side of and within any overt political hierarchy. 
The Semitic moneylenders and merchants also worked in family and tribal gangs that controlled the 
trade routes, markets and guilds. The business of being the rulers of a country was a family project, just 
as the trade guilds were dominated by individual families and tribes. Like the subterranean mycelia of a 
fungus, this genealogical and covert chain-of-command is found to this very day among the Jews who 
infest the seats of power in the governments of the modern world. 

The Sumerian leaders had also assigned their relatives to positions of trust. But the Sumerians saw 
themselves as members of city-states with the god of that city as their supreme focus of attention. As the 
shiftless and wandering, promiscuous, desert-dwelling, Semitic goat-rustlers took over Mesopotamia, 
their genealogical connections which were based on patriarchal hierarchies, replaced serving the gods 
who resided in each particular city with serving the top tribal goat-rustler who controlled the tribes both 
inside and outside of the city as their supreme focus of loyalty. The propensity for the king of the goat- 
rustlers to claim to be a god was something new that they introduced into Mesopotamia. 

But their Semitic claim to godhead was not based upon spiritual knowledge like the pharaohs 
of Egypt or the priests of the temples. The Semitic claim to godhead was based upon the coercive 
dictatorship of a king who could do whatever he wanted and could have whatever he wanted. These 
Semites were gods of the material world and bosses of men. As they profited from the Sumerian Swindle, 
the Amorite kings, who were backed by shekels of silver, tossed spirituality into the trash heap which 
gained them gold but lost them God. 

Although Shamshi-Adad established a powerful Assyrian political and commercial state, his 
death shattered the unity of the northwest. Shamshi-Adad's son, Ishme-Dagan, maintained control over 
Assyria but lost the rest of the upper Euphrates region. Finally, Ishme-Dagan was overthrown, and the 
capital at Shubat-Enlil fell to the Elamites. 

At Mari, Zimri-Lim (1782-1759 BC), son of a former king, reclaimed the throne from the simple- 
minded Yasmakh-Adad. Zimri-Lim and Hammurabi exchanged letters and gifts regularly as signs of 
friendship and good relations. They also maintained foreign ambassadors at each other's courts. [ 137 ] 

Zimri-Lim was an important figure in the cuneiform archives, and many of those letters are 
reports to him from his representatives at the court of Hammurabi. Both kings, as was the custom of the 
time, maintained "foreign advisers", who used their position like modern ambassadors to report upon the 
military and political situation. One of Zimri-Lim's ambassadors, Ibal-pi-El, was particularly boastful of 
his inside knowledge of Babylonian affairs: "When Hammurabi is disturbed by some matter, he does not 
hesitate to send for me, and I go to him wherever he is; whatever the matter that is troubling him, he tells 

On one occasion when messengers were sent to Hammurabi by another ruler, ambassador 
Ibal-pi-El drew them aside at the palace gate before they were admitted to the Babylonian king, thus 
discovering their business. The substance of another report to Hammurabi was acquired through the 
donkey- drivers who accompanied the messengers. [ 138 ] Thus, the use of intelligence gathering and spying 
by the Semitic Amorites was a standard procedure. 

Although surrounded by so many able kings, Hammurabi still remains the symbol of his age. 
However, his modern reputation as great king and legal innovator owes as much to the early discovery 
of cuneiform documents from his reign as to any unique personal attributes he may have possessed. 
Cuneiform letters reveal Hammurabi was an efficient administrator supervising even the most mundane 
matters and also as a just and humane ruler who genuinely made the welfare of his subjects his personal 
care. But one fact alone will ensure Hammurabi's lasting fame, his role as the most successful king of the 


dynasty that made Babylon thereafter the leading city in Western Asia. Never again did any southern city 
of Sumeria rule Mesopotamia, and indeed the sociological pattern imposed on the country in his time 
continued to be felt until the end of its history nearly two thousand years later. [ 139 ] 

This being so, what were these sociological patterns imposed by Hammurabi? First, it must be 
understood that the Sumerian people had not completely vanished. They were being disenfranchised 
and replaced by the Amorites who thereby became the majority population. They had been swindled 
and foreclosed and dispossessed by the moneylenders. And they were being assimilated by language 
into the dominant Akkadian-speaking society. At the same time, however, the Amorites accepted the 
higher Sumerian culture as their own and began to follow the ancient Sumerian ways. These ancient ways 
were represented by worshipping the Sumerian gods and practicing the Sumerian Culture with all of its 
inventions. It was only slowly that the Amorites began naming the old Sumerian gods with their own 
Akkadian names. But this process took centuries. 

Of a more immediate need, Hammurabi found himself as an Amorite leader of territories that 
included the original Sumerian people as well as increasing numbers of his own Amorite people. To lead 
this mixed racial society required political skill and wisdom. Hammurabi was up to the challenge. 

Hammurabi followed a vigorous policy of canal-building, to bring agricultural prosperity to his 
land. He welded into one kingdom the many city-states of Sumer and Akkad, and gave the whole land 
one language for administration and business and a unified legal system. But reflecting their debt to and 
respect for Sumerian culture, the ancient Sumerian language continued to be used liturgically in the 
temples for as long as Babylonia endured. [ 140 ] 

Cuneiform texts from the reign of Hammurabi, documents from Larsa at the time of Rim-Sin, 
contemporary letters from Shemshara in northeastern Iraq, and archives from Mari and Sippar provide 
social and economic data far greater than exist for many later periods in history, even in western Europe. 
[ 141 ] And most certainly, this historical data exists in greater extent that those stories found in the Bible. 
But these cuneiform documents were only discovered beneath the rubble of millennia during the past 
1 50 years of modern archeology. Therefore, the persistent lies and myths of the rabbis, repeated for over 
2,500 years, have had a longer influence on Western culture than the long-buried and recently translated 
cuneiform documents of the ancient Near East. Volumes I and II of this study aims to correct those 
rabbinical prevarications. 

The sociological pattern imposed upon the land by Hammurabi continued to be felt until the end 
of Babylonian history. His military achievements, however, did not long survive Hammurabi himself. 
Racial movements caused by the stirring of the Indo-European tribes beyond the Caucasus and the 
effects of the southward migration of these peoples now began to be felt.[ 142 ] 

During this Old Babylonian phase of Mesopotamian history, new ideas about how a society 
should be led and why a society exists began to form. The Semitic Amorites were quite different from the 
Sumerians in their ideas about what makes an honest and true society. 

The Semitic Akkadians and Amorites were an entirely different strain of people than the 
Sumerians who had founded civilization more than a thousand years previously. Basically, they were 
more ruthless and cruel. They did not have behind them thousands of years of the mellowing effects of 
reliable crops and full stomachs. They were more imbued with a scrubby existence with their herds of 
goats and sheep as they roamed from one watering hole to the next. Though they absorbed Sumerian 
Culture and made it their own, the Amorites did not value honesty and "the straight thing" as much 
as they did clever craftiness. Even in modern times, those traits persist among today's Semitic peoples 
where they believe that the worthiness of a man is found in his ability to deceive his fellows and to gain 
the advantage through trickery and lies. This is how "it has always been" among these people and 6,000 
years has not been long enough to erase this cultural and genetic trait even in today's modern world of 
deceiving Jews and lying Muslims. 


Herding goats and sheep, dwelling in tents, living the nomadic life in the semi-arid and desert 
regions of Arabia and Syria, these crude and barbarous people were in awe of the great cities and 
ingenious ways of the agrarian Sumerians. When they could leave their stinking, goat-hair tents and 
half-starved existence on the deserts in exchange for the clean labor and full stomachs of a farming life 
or when they could exchange military service for land ownership, they did so. The moneylenders of 
Sumeria had been hiring cheap labor from the surrounding barbarians for over two thousand years, 
larcenously replacing the Sumerian native sons with foreign workers. Also, the Sumerian kings had been 
hiring foreign mercenaries in exchange for farm lands, army rations and loot. And so, between the greedy 
moneylenders and the ambitious kings, the Sumerian people were gradually disenfranchised from their 
own lands and replaced with foreigners. 

But the kings and moneylenders did not disenfranchise or replace themselves. No, of course not! 
They became the Ruling Elite over the new immigrants. These kings and merchants and moneylenders 
were the awilum [the Haves], the Ruling Elite who were willing to betray their own people just as long 
as they could continue to be the Ruling Elite with the muskenum [Have-Nots] bowing at their feet. 
And if their own people would not bow down, then this Treasonous Class replaced them with foreign 
muskenum [Have-Nots] who would accept being the footstool for the feet of the awilum [the Haves] in 
exchange for a bowl of barley gruel. 

But the Amorite immigrants were not fools. They could clearly see the advantages for themselves 
to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian farmers. So, their natural suspicions 
prompted them to ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you not betraying your own people by 
doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 
because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Amorites had no reason to hate tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders], yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and 
generosity to the new immigrants, those Amorites who could not afford the full price, the money 
lenders let them buy on time at low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the Babylonia money lenders 
jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the 
moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words 
and low interest rates, coiled around its prey. It's bite would come later. 

To repeat once again, just as in ancient times so it is today, the driving force of political power 
is physical occupation . Political power comes from physical occupation, not historical rights, not title 
deeds, not moral rights - only occupation. The moneylenders and merchants claimed title and ownership 
to all properties that they had swindled from the Sumerians. Then, they occupied these lands with their 
own hired gangs of alien labor. 

All the while that the moneylenders were betraying their own people, the "good deals" and the 
"generous loan arrangements" that they had made to the aliens and foreign immigrants made them the 
"best friends" of these new masters of the land. 

This Secret Fraud #15 of the Sumerian Swindle was discovered by the moneylenders at an 
early date: "Loans to friends are power; loans to enemies are weapons." The moneylenders of Sumeria 
had used loans at high interest rates as a weapon against their own people so as to betray, impoverish, 
disposses and enslave them. Then, to sell off the foreclosed properties and slaves, they gave loans at 


low interest rates to the foreigners, thus entrapping the new immigrants into the Sumerian Swindle 
with cheap loans. Welcoming the foreigners with smiles and open arms, the merchant-moneylenders 
used loans at low interest rates to lock the foreigners into payments on the foreclosed properties. They 
did not sell the property to foreigners for less than it was worth; they merely sold it at a lower interest 
rate. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began their long series of swindles throughout world 
history by destroying their own people while befriending the enemies of their people. And why not? 
They made a profit both ways. Once the immigrants were locked into paying low interest rates with the 
Sumerian Swindle "just as it had always been", then the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] raised the 
rates on their next loans and eventually they swindled their new "best friends" out of the property. The 
moneylenders never lost money; they merely manipulated the People and the market so that sometimes 
they made more profit and sometimes they made less profit. But they always profited from the Sumerian 

Historically, the Amorites (2200-2000 BC) were followed by the Aramaeans (1200-1000 BC) who, 
in turn, were followed by the Arabs (800 BC). But they all had in common their Semitic language dialects 
and nomadic lifestyle that was not tied to a single geographical area. Because they had no permanent 
territorial claims, these groups identified themselves not by city or country but by tribes and by the ties 
of their genealogical bloodlines. Not being associated with a geographical area, descent from a common 
ancestor was of great importance in tribal affiliation. As they all moved about in search of grazing lands 
and water, tribal affiliations changed, tribes constantly absorbed other tribes or split up and individuals 
even changed their tribal status. [ 143 ] So, their connections to one another through genealogy became 
an important part of their personal identity. Though this genealogical identity could be altered merely 
through craftiness and deceit, it was still an important part of the tribal hierarchy and social prestige 
between tribes and between individual members of tribes. The relationship of the Semites to one another 
genealogically transcended any affiliation or loyalty to any particular city or country because they were 
family-based gangs, just as they are today. 

The incursion and settlement of nomadic groups was and remains today a complex process 
of interaction between settled and tribal societies that has often been misunderstood. Certainly these 
peoples at times preyed upon the people of the settled lands. A Sumerian story describes the Amorites 
as "hovering over the walls of Uruk like flocks of birds", but in general their incursions took the form of 
raids, not invasions. Economic distress caused by drought or too many children often persuaded nomadic 
peoples to seek employment as laborers on the land, or - and this is frequently attested in the cuneiform 
tablets - as hired mercenaries. Other immigrants appear deliberately to have chosen the mercenary role 
because their pay included grants of land as well as loot from the campaigns on which they served. By 
such means, groups of pastoralists, indeed sometimes whole tribes, came in time to acquire not only the 
settled ways of their hosts but their language and culture as well. And like the Mexicans in modern day 
America, or the Muslims in modern day Europe, they were an undermining and subversive element to 

There is certainly no direct route from the role of true bedouin to that of head of state. The groups 
that became true city-dwellers had passed some time in the intermediate stage of dependence upon 
their settled agricultural neighbors. As can be seen in modern societies, within one single generation of 
children such immigrants as Mexicans, Pakistanis or Chinese can become fully functional in a European 
or American country, learning to read and write and speak the language without inflection. When we are 
dealing with the ancient countries of the ancient Near East such cultural progress was actually faster since 
the many scribes reduced the need for anyone to read and write. And in the time frames of one or two 
hundred years, the social climbing from goat-rustlers to city governor became increasingly common. Just 
as in modern America or England where such an oddity as a turban-wearing, English-speaking Sikh in 
the space of one generation becomes elected to city councils, it was no different than in the ancient times. 



Amorites became the rulers of many Mesopotamian cities. Most prominent among these 
rulers was Shamshi-Adad I (-1830-1776 BC), who created a state encompassing nearly all of upper 
Mesopotamia and whose ancestors were described as those "who lived in tents". His famous Amorite 
contemporary in the south, Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) of Babylon, also derived his lineage from the 
same tent-dwelling ancestors. And though they became kings of walled cities, they could still trace their 
ancestry back along patriarchal tribal lines. 

The Amorites sometimes split into "Sons of the North" and "Sons of the South," but the two 
groups were basically the same people. In a letter, Zimri-Lim (1782-1759 BC) was portrayed as governing 
both the sedentary Akkadian population of Mari and the tribes of his own Amorite origins. The Amorites 
who occupied the cities were very familiar with the methods where-by goat-rustlers could take over city 
dwellers. So, the well-fed Amorites behind the walls of Mari kept careful watch on the movements of the 
roaming Amorites nomads and even tried to control their migratory patterns. Mari frequently employed 
tribal members in corvee labor and military service. Such nomads were also economically dependent 
upon the agrarian population, particularly for grain. [ 145 ] Because the irrigated lands of Mesopotamia 
were the breadbasket of the ancient Near East, the surrounding peoples depended upon its fertile soil and 
either traded their raw materials for Mesopotamian grain or sent raiding parties to steal it. 

The Mari archives fill out this historical framework with a remarkably detailed picture of public 
administration, political intrigue, and the work of officialdom during that period. We frequently read of 
the dispatch of ambassadors, while the correspondence between the various Amorite rulers which we 
find in the Mari letters is full of references to troop movements, the units concerned being numbered 
in thousands rather than hundreds. Ration lists for officers and troops enable an estimate to be given of 
the forces present in Mari, which amounted to a minimum of ten thousand in the state, of which four 
thousand were in garrison at the capital. The duties of such troops were largely concerned with protection 
of the settled populations against the marauding Amorite tribes. 

Mari on the Upper Euphrates was famous for its copper and bronze tool and weapons production. 
Raw materials were shipped down the trade routes along the river and finished products were shipped 
in both the up-river and down-river trade. These goods from Mari included objects such as swords, 
ploughshares, parts for chariots, copper pots and pans, bangles, fish-hooks, needles, mirrors, braziers, 
tweezers, and knives. Gold and silver ornaments were produced for the kings and temples and for the 
very wealthy. And, reflecting the huge petroleum reserves that would cause so much warfare and chaos in 
modern times, Mari made extensive use of bitumen from the famous bitumen lake near Hit to the south 
of Mari. This bitumen was used as both a tar and a pitch to waterproof floors, as mortar between bricks, 
as a caulking for boats and as a flooring pavement mixed with ground limestone. And everywhere, along 
the river towns and cities, pottery was produced and bricks were made. 

Farming and irrigation was everywhere the main occupation of the People. The irrigated area 
extended to a depth of three or four miles along the right (south) bank of the Euphrates for most of 
the two hundred mile extent of the kingdom of Mari. There was a huge network of canals with special 
officials to supervise them. In time of necessity, all the able-bodied men of a district, townsmen as well as 
villagers, could be called out to work on them, either to clear them of rushes and water- weeds or to dig 
out sections where silt had accumulated or to build up and consolidate the banks against floods. [ 146 ] 

It should be noted that even though the simple-minded Yasmakh- Adad of Mari and his father 
and brother were Amorites, it was against the roaming tribes of Amorite bandits and goat rustlers that 
they had to be on guard. Writing to Ishme-Dagan, his brother and his senior, he explained that of a 
thousand troops, five hundred guarded the town and the other half guarded the cattle. Economic as well 
as military and political co-operation was practiced by the Amorite rulers. For example, the sub-king 
of Mari, when pasture was scarce in his own territory, sought from the sub-king of Qatna permission to 


have his flocks pastured with the flocks of Qatna, a request to which the sub-king of Qatna acceded. [ 147 ] 

Besides the food and manufactured goods that it produced, the control of Mari was important 
as a stage on the trade route up the Euphrates between the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean. [ 148 ] So, 
whoever controlled Mari also controlled this vital trade route. From the earliest times the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] as well as the kings understood the value of Secret Fraud #21 of the Sumerian 
Swindle: "Control the choke points and master the body; strangle the choke points and kill the body." 

The Old Babylonian archives from Mari reveal a number of West Semitic tribes pursuing 
their migratory role as fully fledged pastoralists or in the service of local rulers. That the genealogical 
relationships between the Semitic tribes took precedence over all other loyalties, is stated in a letter 
from a palace official to Zimri-Lim of Mari (1782-1759 BC). Even though he is a king of a great city like 
Mari on the Euphrates, the letter reminds him that he is also king of the Hanu, a tribal federation from 
whom many mercenaries were drawn. Therefore, this Amorite official states that Zimri-Lim is "in the 
second place, king of the Akkadians". Thus, this Amorite palace official was reminding Zimri-Lim that 
his relatives and his genealogical blood-lines took precedence over his city-dwelling job as a king and 
over his loyalty to the city people who trusted him as their leader. This same tribal attitude is found today 
among the Jews who infest the positions of authority in Western governments with both dual citizenships 
and secondary loyalties to the countries that they betray. 

Another tribal federation of this period were the Binu-Yamina, a name meaning "Sons of the 
South" which is linguistically related to the Old Testament tribal name of Benjamin. Patterns of tribal 
migration, and indeed tribal structure correspond closely with those that are known among modern 
Bedouin. The Amorite sheikh was called "father" in Akkadian, and as in modern tribal society it was he 
who bore full responsibility for the activities of his followers. These desert sheikhs (or "fathers") were 
treated with respect and considerable diplomacy though occasionally with some impatience by the rulers 
of Mari, and a variety of letters make clear the complicated relationships between the two.[ 149 ] Once 
again, for future reference, special note should be taken that the Semitic tribe known as Binu-Yamina 
(Benjamin) was present in Mesopotamia long before they were known in Palestine. There is a reason for 
this as you shall see. 

These Amorite sheikhs were not the camel-riding nomads of modern myth. Camels were first 
domesticated in the third millennium BC in Arabia and would not be common in Mesopotamia for 
another five hundred years after the rise of Hammurabi's Babylonia. It would not be until the end of 
the second millennium BC that camel-riding nomads from Arabia would begin a thriving trade in 
incense and spices from southern Arabia to the markets of the Levant and Mesopotamia. [ 150 ] No, these 
wandering Semites of Mesopotamia did not ride majestic camels, they herded their goats and roamed 
about riding on donkeys. 

As the Semitic city-states such as Babylon began to gain power, these increasingly sophisticated 
and urbanized tribesmen took over the entire Sumerian heritage - cuneiform script, literature, 
astronomy, laws, and mathematics, merely adapting these as required. Their only innovation 
(appropriately, for a vast trading empire) seems to have been the standardization of the system of weights 
and measures, which were to remain standard in the Middle East for the next two thousand years. [ 151 ] 

As the Semites gained control of society, they accepted the Sumerian social order mostly as they 
had found it. After more than two thousand years, Mesopotamian society was still composed of two 
main groups, the awilum [the Haves], and those dependent upon them, the muskenum [the Have-Nots]. 
Money lending had had its deleterious effects but was still accepted as something normal because that is 
"how it had always been". The Semitic Amorites controlling Mesopotamian culture and politics didn't see 
any reason to make any changes in an ancient society that was superior to their own shiftless tribal roots. 
What changes that the Amorites made were strictly for their own benefit. With Semitic cruelty, they gave 
the two social strata a more rigorous definition. 


As they became rulers of the Sumerian civilization, the essential legal position of the muskenum 
[the have-nots] was that he was singled out for protection as a dependant of the state or crown. Such 
royal dependants were supported with rations in exchange for services to the palace. Because they did 
not own land and were in debt to the moneylenders, the basic implication of inferiority had led, at 
the beginning of the Old Babylonian period, to the connotation of pauperism which later became the 
primary meaning of the word. Under the Amorite moneylenders, social strata shifted downward as the 
poor became very poor and the very poor became slaves. 

Below the muskenum [the Have-Nots] were the wardum [the slaves]. Most Mesopotamian slaves 
originated from the native population. Defaulting debtors and penniless men and women often sold 
themselves or their children into slavery, or were seized by creditors. The merchants also dealt in foreign 
slaves, Subarians from the north being the most in demand while war captives normally became the 
property of the king and slaves of the state. Together with the corvee gangs and some hired labor, they 
constructed roads, dug canals, erected military fortifications, built temples, tilled the crown lands and 
worked in temple factories. State slaves were housed in special barracks, their names, ages and lands of 
origin recorded in special registers. Temple slaves were recruited both from prisoners of war and from 
dedications made by private individuals. 

You Readers who are of African descent, make note of this: the slaves of the ancient Near East 
were not Negroes. They were Indo-Europeans, Caucasians and Middle Easterners captured in war or 
indebted to the moneylenders. It would be another 3000 years before Negro slaves would become the 
primary victims of the merchants and moneylenders. The Negro slave trade, beginning sometime around 
1500 AD and lasting until the American Civil War of the 1860s AD, was a brutal business lasting nearly 
400 years. But it is short-sighted to imagine those 400 years to be more significant than the nearly 5000 
years that white people were slaves to the merchants and moneylenders. 

Private slaves were relatively uncommon, and were employed largely in domestic service. Private 
slaves were uncommon among the ordinary people because they were expensive to own. But at no 
time since the beginnings of Sumerian civilization around 3100 BC to 2000 BC, was slave ownership 
uncommon for the moneylenders and rich merchants. The awilum [the Haves] owned slaves. And the 
muskenum [Have-Nots] worked for pitiful wages that were carefully calculated to be just enough to make 
them grateful that they were better off than the slaves. Indeed, slavery was not only one of the inevitable 
results of moneylending but it was also, for the perverted lusts of the moneylenders and merchants, one 
of the perquisites of the moneylending profession. From the earliest times, the moneylenders were sex 
fiends and perverts as well as being ruthless usurers and parasites of Mankind. They did not work but 
merely directed those who worked for them. With plenty of leisure time, they invoked their authority and 
indulged their lusts among their slaves. 

The Sumerians were more ruthlessly betrayed by the Akkadian moneylenders and 
disenfranchised by the Semitic Amorites than they had been when Sumerian moneylenders stood behind 
the kings. The average price for a slave in the Old Babylonian period was approximately 20 shekels of 
silver, sometimes rising to as high as 90 shekels. The average wage paid for hired labor was some 10 
shekels a year. That is, 10 shekels would be the yearly wage of a laborer if he was fully employed. But part- 
time help and the payment of wages in measures of grain could reduce the costs of labor dramatically for 
the land-owner. Thus, it was far cheaper for a landowner to employ seasonal labor than to own a slave 
who was tasked specifically for agricultural work. Seasonal workers who were on the edge of starvation 
worked cheaper than a slave who had to be well-fed to protect the investment of his purchase cost. 

By far the most common system of working the land at this period was one of tenant farming. The 
tenant received seed, animals, and implements, in the form of non-interest bearing loans, for which the 
tenant returned a set percentage of the harvest. [ 152 ] The percentage of the harvest that was given to the 
landlord was the actual interest on the loan and that percentage was not small. Like all moneylenders, the 


Semitic moneylenders demanded as much as they could get for their investments. For the loan of silver 
for a trade investment, a one hundred percent return on their investment was common. This high return 
on investment was not only an indication of the high profits found in trade but also the monopolies over 
the wholesale trade controlled by the guilds, the temples and the king. So, the rich merchants became 
richer as they squeezed out the competition and strictly extracted maximum profits from their retail 
shops and from the traveling peddlers to the outlying villages. 

A poor man would not dare to default on any loans because the only alternative was slavery for 
himself or his family members. A modern credit card debt-slave who finds himself struggling to repay 
the compounded 15% or 30% interest on his credit cards perhaps can understand in a small way the 
anxiety and panic that a Babylonian debtor must have felt when the impossible amounts of 100% percent 
interest were accelerated into the stratosphere by the scribes calculating upon tablets of wet clay in 
cuneiform script. Under such usury, the moneylenders seized the people for their debts and terrorized 
those who were still free men. So, in addition to wealth, they gained a certain kind of prestige based upon 
fear. It was a prestige that they enjoyed from debtors who bowed at their feet out of a fearful respect for 
what they could do if the loan was not repaid or out of supplication and a begging for mercy. But mercy 
was something that the moneylenders and merchants demanded and reserved only for themselves. 

In Babylonia, farmland was valued according to the anticipated annual yield. Rent tablets show 
the owner receiving one-third to one-half of the crop. Private land leases frequently indicated who was 
expected to furnish the tools, animals, and seed, and who paid the taxes. If the landlord paid these costs, 
he reduced the laborers' share to one-third or one-quarter of the crop, thus, keeping them as indentured 
servants. The merchants, moneylenders and landlords, all members of the awilum class [the Haves] , 
could get away with such high profits because by the time of Hammurabi, the Sumerian Swindle had 
concentrated so much wealth into the hands of the awilum [Haves] that the muskenum [Have-Nots] had 
the choice only of working for near-starvation wages or actually starving to death. That is, the wages were 
low and the work was hard, but accept them or die. 

As the moneylenders grew in wealth during the next thousand years, banking firms, such as the 
House of Egibi in Babylon during the later Neo-Babylonian and Persian periods, acted as real estate 
managers by renting fields for the super- wealthy absentee landlords. The House of Murashu of Babylon, 
in the banking business in the last half of the fifth century BC, rented royal lands to tenant farmers and 
acted as agents in converting agricultural profits into silver. Big business required extended families, 
every member dedicated to perpetuating the Sumerian Swindle. 

Throughout Mesopotamia, in the earliest days, there was far more fertile land available than there 
were workers to cultivate it because the population of Mankind was still relatively small. The riverine 
lands of Mesopotamia only needed the labor necessary to build irrigation systems in order to turn the dry 
earth into green fields. But land development did not produce an immediate return. And the landowners 
did not appreciate lazy tenants who only grew enough food for themselves without the excess production 
necessary as the interest payments demanded by the landowners. So, law codes and leases emphasized 
the duty of the tenant to keep the soil and fieldwork in good order. The individual farmer profited from 
intensive cultivation of less land. Intensive cultivation is more efficient, is less work and produces a higher 
yield per measure of land, just as it does today. However, the owner profited most by cultivating the 
largest possible area. [ 153 ] The moneylenders and landlords preferred to pay minimum wages in grain to 
large numbers of workers who cultivated large fields just as they do today on the corporate farms using 
immigrant labor. From Babylonian times, the life of the People became increasingly tied to the profits of 
the moneylenders. And the moneylenders wanted to keep it that way. 

Once again you should understand that the most striking organizational characteristic of 
Mesopotamian society in all periods was its economic division into the awilum [Haves] and the 
muskenum [Have-Nots] - that is, those who held land and wealth and those dependent upon the wealthy 


landholders. This was a feature of this first civilization from its earliest Ubaidian beginnings but it became 
more ruthlessly established once the Semites (Akkadians, Amorites, Aramaeans) began to take over 
the reins of power. Private, literary, and legal documents (including Hammurabi's Law Code) portray 
a society in which individual rights again became an issue. A considerable portion of the populace was 
legally free, attached to neither palace nor temple and owning their own fields outright. But if they did 
not own their own fields, they were free to either starve to death or work for the awilum [the Haves] at 
low wages. The private sector of the economy flourished in Amorite-dominated Babylonia, similar to the 
situation under the Amorites' Semitic predecessors, the Akkadians under Sargon. [ 154 ] 

Under Semitic rule, Mesopotamian society constantly became less spiritually centered and more 
materially centered as the muskenum [the Have-Nots] and the wardum [the slaves] found themselves 
no longer working in service to God but rather they found themselves working in bondage to the 
moneylenders, landlords and kings - the Ruling Elite. 

Who were these Ruling Elite moneylenders who held themselves aloof and superior to those 
whom they had defrauded? They were swindlers, thieves, sex fiends, homosexual perverts, betrayers, 
pimps and murderers using the Sumerian Swindle to rob their people and their country while satisfying 
their own material desires. And yet, they were at the very top of society simply because as awilum 
[Haves] they and their extended families had acquired wealth and power so gradually over the centuries 
that no one noticed that they were criminals. 

This division of society into the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots] was a result 
of the early use of the Sumerian Swindle and then of acquiescing to that Swindle simply because it 
"had always been here". But there was another invention that began to influence Society and to assume 
a power that was greater than its sum. And that was a respect for a rule of laws that had been put into 
writing. Writing was a useful invention but once laws began to be written, they tended to give a validity 
to themselves that was far beyond either the goodness or the falseness of the law. Regardless of whether 
such laws were good or bad laws, once they began to be written down they gained a power of God and of 
Eternity and of the King, simply because they were written in stone. 

Laws were originally decreed by the mouth of the king. But writing these decrees onto the clay 
tablets gave those laws an unchanging and eternal character. Written laws became a contract between the 
king and his people written on clay. When the clay tablets were baked, they became a contract written 
in stone. And when the king proclaimed himself to be a servant of the gods, then these laws became a 
contract between the People and the gods with the king acting as the middleman and the enforcer of 
these laws. And so, written laws became a powerful invention for controlling and structuring society 
especially since the clay tablets lasted hundreds and thousands of years longer than did the kings who 
decreed them. The kings became dust while the laws written on the stone tablets became eternal decrees 
of the kings and the gods who stood behind them. 

There are three basic concepts to keep in mind as you study Hammurabi's Babylon. First, both 
civil and criminal laws are usually made to address problems as they arise. They do not merely come into 
being for no reason. Second, laws are written by the rich and the powerful to protect their wealth and 
their power. This is true today just as it was in ancient times. In addition, laws can also be written by the 
social administrators (kings, in this case) as a way to regulate and control society in a commonly accepted 
manner. And third, "justice" and "law" are not necessarily synonymous terms. There can be laws that 
are "just" and there can be laws that are "unjust". Both are enforceable laws. Whether they are laws that 
promote "justice" or laws that promote "injustice", both are backed by the enforcement power of the State. 

As the Amorites gained control over the peoples of Mesopotamia, they began to replace the 
human-centered and god-centered laws and traditions of the Sumerians with their own harsher, wealth- 
centered laws of the Semites. Even as these unjust laws were put into place, they still had the aura of 
respect given to them by the People because they were laws that allegedly came from the king, the one 


whom the gods had chosen to lead and protect the People. These laws were written down for all to see 
who could read. Though the numbers of those who could read during Hammurabi's time were still 
relatively small, the laws actually had more power over those who could not read simply because in their 
innocent ignorance, they respected and revered the kings, priests, and the swindling moneylenders who 
stood above them, reading the words that were as mysterious to them as any other act of the gods. 

Sumerian respect for the rule of law and its divine source via the king, was carried over into 
Babylonian society by the Amorites because it served their purposes. By this time, the moneylenders had 
found that "justice" belonged to those who wrote the laws. Although they were members of the Ruling 
Elite and had the power to influence the king, only the king could write the laws. 

Once again remember, writing was not invented to compose great poems or novels or hymns to 
God; it was invented to keep track of inventory and manage business agreements. This was true in the 
very beginning of civilization around 3 1 00 BC and it was increasingly true during the formation of the 
Babylonian empire some 1,350 years later. 

What a society values most can be seen in the types of writings that they produce. A very large 
proportion of the cuneiform documents so far recovered - put as high as 95 per cent in the case of those 
in the Sumerian language, and probably not far short of that in the case of Akkadian - consists of the 
type of records sometimes referred to loosely as "contracts", although they are mainly receipts, accounts 
and records of transactions of various other kinds concerning property. These contracts, taking up 95% of 
all Sumerian and Babylonian writings, were a vital and necessary part of the legal, social and religious life 
of all of these people throughout Mesopotamia. Keep this high percentage in mind because the subject of 
contracts will be brought up in later chapters although in a unique way. 

It was generally recognized that a property transaction without written record was not valid, 
and to alter such a document was a heinous offence. [ 155 ] Thus, the main concern for the writers of 
contracts was business, interest-bearing loans, inheritance, and the exchange of goods and services, etc. 
Contracts became even more important to those who operated the Babylonia empire because the more 
humane character of the Sumerians was completely replaced with the more ruthless nature of the Semitic 
Amorites. Under the Amorites, laws justifying financial transactions became more important than laws 
justifying relations between Men. 

In Sumerian society, the overwhelming reason for the very existence of Mankind was for service 
to the gods. All of Sumerian society worked toward that goal. This God-conscious lifestyle had given the 
Sumerians the tranquillity, peaceful nature and leisure to create most of the inventions that had produced 
a vibrant Sumerian civilization. These great inventions, many of them over 9,000 years old, are still in 
use by modern Man today. And since all of the Sumerian people were mutually involved in this work 
of service to God and social maintenance, no Sumerian ever went hungry, without clothes or without a 
place to call home. There was always work to be done that paid in rations of grain or measures of oil or 
wool. These could be consumed or bartered. 

Although sometimes at war over land or water rights, Sumerian society was composed of cities 
and villages that worked in harmony for the common good and which provided for even the poorest of 
its citizens in a humane way. Even the poorest widow could gather a bundle of sticks to trade for a fish 
from the vendor or a handful of grain from a neighbor. Everybody made a living. 

But as the moneylenders began replacing their own people with foreign labor, the competition 
for basic necessities became more severe. The cost of labor went down, much to the satisfaction of the 
landlords and moneylenders, because people who were desperate for something to eat began to work for 
less and less in wages as the numbers of foreigners increased to take their jobs. 

During the Sumerian revival of the Third Dynasty of Ur, wages were calculated on a daily basis, 
and rations on a monthly basis. From this Ur III period on, the daily wage of a worker was 10 liters 
(about 2.5 gallons) of barley. This was a huge amount of food, far more than one man could eat by 


himself, enough to feed an extended family including grandparents and leaving enough left over for 
storage against the off-season or for re-sale or for savings to buy some land. This standard wage appeared 
in school books and continued to be an ideal for two thousand years. 

However, regardless of this ideal wage, as the moneylenders foreclosed on more and more 
swindled properties and imported more immigrants, the actual hiring contracts showed that most people 
earned much less than ten liters per day. The Semitic landlords and merchants (Akkadians, Amorites, 
Aramaeans) could negotiate for lower wages if they could cause the workers to become desperate enough. 
And with a surplus of foreign workers, daily rations for male workers went as low as two liters of bread 
and two liters of beer - bare subsistence level for one man and not enough if a family was supported from 
these rations. Workers also received two kilograms of wool per year, barely enough to make one garment. 
On special occasions, such as the New Year, workers might receive extra rations of barley, meat, and oil. 
Middle or higher officials had for their private use a subsistence field of approximately six to thirty-six 
hectares (15 to 90 acres). The disappearance or running away of workers was not uncommon when they 
realized the huge amount of work expected of them for starvation wages. 

Once in debt, people easily became impoverished due to the usurious rates of interest which 
had to be limited by decree of the king to 20 percent for silver and 12 percent for grain. As in modern 
times, the moneylenders tacked on additional amounts as penalties for late payments and then charged 
interest on those penalties. When the borrower could no longer pay these usurious rates made even 
more impossible through compound interest, he had to repay his debt by working for his creditor. At all 
times during Mesopotamian history, the hopes and fears of all levels of the People were reflected in the 
omen texts: the poor hoping to become rich, the rich fearing poverty, and both rich and poor worried 
about interference from the palace. As early as the Third Dynasty of Ur, a system of balanced accounts 
grew from the elaborate procedures of receipts, debits, and redistribution. Each account tablet provided 
a balance sheet and was part of an elaborate series of successive statements, incomes, and expenses. 
Bookkeeping became an account of daily life. [ 156 ] As the Semitic Amorites began to supercede Sumerian 
society, both the importance of accounting tablets and written contracts was literally, in the case of baked 
clay tablets, written in stone. No business could be done without a written agreement or a contract. No 
agreement was valid without a written contract. 

A few of the Sumerian kings, upon their ascension to office, had tried to ameliorate some of the 
social destruction caused by the moneylenders with decrees which forgave the debt-slaves and released 
them from bondage. These kings gave back to the widows and orphans the lands and houses that the 
perfidious moneylenders had seized for the debts of deceased fathers. The kings took the swindled 
properties away from the moneylenders and returned them to their rightful owners. Of course, these 
kings were very popular with the people whom they wanted to protect and these manumissions of 
debt became a general policy of many kings when they first took power. However, none of these kings 
understood the basic, root problem caused by the Sumerian Swindle because it "had always been here". 
They accepted it as an ordinary part of civilization while trying to solve the on-going problems that the 
Sumerian Swindle had caused society with their temporary fixes of forgiving debts. 

In the Sumerian system, as lord and owner of everything, the temple took steps by the issue of 
rations from the temple granaries to tide over the community during times of flood, drought, blight or 
sickness. But as the Semitic Babylonian system took precedence, the independent land-owning peasant 
now had to borrow from the temples or from the moneylenders and merchants to stay alive - and borrow 
at interest. Over the years, this resulted in the greater part of the peasantry becoming the victims to a 
crippling load of debt and the situation could only be cleared by drastic measures, namely by a general 
remission of debts and a fresh start. 

And yet for all of this, the Amorite King Hammurabi is famous for his Code of Laws and for his 
concern for justice. The word used for "justice" meant literally "the straight thing". Hammurabi made the 


establishment of justice one of his first concerns at his accession; and the formula by which his second 
regal year was known was "the year in which he set forth justice in the land", a formula also employed by 
certain other rulers. The "justice" referred to meant, primarily, economic justice. 

Hammurabi explained his rise to kingship in the prologue to his laws: "At that time, the gods 
Anu and Enlil, for the enhancement of the well-being of the people, named me by name: Hammurabi, 
the pious prince, who venerates the gods, to make justice prevail in the land, to abolish the wicked and 
the evil, to prevent the strong from oppressing the weak, to rise like the sun-god Shamash, over all 
humankind, to illuminate the land."[ 157 ] 

One of the concerns of the king, to prevent exploitation of the population by the holders of large 
estates with consequent economic distress and political instability, involved the issue of decrees fixing 
prices and wages. [ 158 ] Price caps had to be attempted because by Hammurabi's time, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] guilds had such a monopoly of transportation and of the markets that "supply 
and demand" economics did not exist. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] controlled both the 
supply and the transportation so they could demand whatever they wanted. 

As a result of the monopoly ownership of farms, river transportation and markets by the 
merchants and moneylenders, prices rose and wages were lowered to satisfy their insatiable greed. While 
controlling supplies, these voraciously greedy merchants squeezed the People for whatever the market 
would bear. Like the moneylenders, the merchants could acquire an inordinate amount of the wealth 
from the entire nation simply by raising prices while controlling the wholesale sources and transportation 
costs. With the moneylenders squeezing the people before they could make a living and the merchants 
squeezing the people while they were trying to make a living and then controlling the markets for their 
goods after the harvest - just like in modern times - the rich got richer and the poor got poorer with 
neither the People nor the king understanding the basic cause of their problems. As the Amorites took 
over Sumerian culture, the secrets of the Sumerian Swindle were still tightly held by the conspiring 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. These secrets were only passed along through family alliances. 
After all, it was a swindle so even the kings must never know. 

As an indication of what the kings considered to be the most important issues of their times, 
they naturally listed the most important topics first and the less important last. Hammurabi's Law Code 
contains sections dealing with rates of hire and wages at the very end of the laws immediately before the 
epilogue. So, wages for the People was the last thing that concerned Hammurabi. The laws of the Amorite 
state of Eshnunna, ante-dating Hammurabi by at least a century, begins with a list of controlled prices of 
most of the commodities basic to the economy such as barley, oil of various kinds, lard, wool, salt, spices 
and copper. These are followed by clauses fixing the rate of hire of wagons and boats and the wages of 
various agricultural workers. [ 159 ] So, inflation of prices were first in importance in Eshnunna and wages 
were second in importance. But try as the kings might to give justice to their people, the subterranean 
forces of the merchants and the moneylenders were a perpetual source of subterfuge and corruption. A 
good king working to make his people happy and prosperous was consistently being undermined by the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who were working to make themselves prosperous at the expense 
of everybody else. 

Before looking deeper into those famous Laws of Hammurabi to further identify the roots of our 
modern day problems, it is profitable to have a peek at the kinds of people whom these laws attempted to 
regulate. The Semitic merchants and moneylenders of Babylon were an unscrupulous lot and their evil 
designs are felt even into our modern times today, over 4,000 years later. 

Standardizing the weights and measures was one of Hammurabi's earliest acts for "bringing 
justice to the land". Since Udaidian times before writing was invented, and throughout the entire ancient 
Near East, the various regions had used a variety of weights and measurements. Even when they called 
these weights and measures by the same name, they were not identical. Within a region or within the 


boundaries of an individual city-state, the People could deal with one another fairly since they all used 
the same weights. But a shekel weight of silver (~8 grams) or a sila measure of grain (~ 1 liter) in Nippur 
would not be the same as a shekel or sila in Ashur. The wily merchants could take advantage of this 
by first switching to heavier weights and bigger measuring baskets when they bought goods and then 
switching back to lighter weights and smaller baskets when they sold - and all while calling the different 
measures "shekels" and "silas". Hammurabi put a stop to this by standardizing all weights and measures 
throughout his empire. Of course, this did not stop the merchants from continuing to switch the 
measures when they could get away with it anymore than laws in modern days can stop the butcher from 
putting his thumb on the scale. 

The Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] was the central figure in Old Babylonian 
trade, although at times he appears to have been more of a banker than a merchant. But he was also a 
broker, a merchant baler, a money-lender, and even a government agent. [ 160 ] Everything connected with 
increasing his wealth was of interest to the tamkarum . Sometimes he traveled with his merchandise, but 
often he dispatched agents acting in his stead. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] was essentially 
a private capitalist. However, under Hammurabi there was extensive trade in mass production items 
conducted by the government and directed by official "overseers" known as wakil tamkari . As an 
accessory task, these officials collected and administered the taxes owed by merchant-moneylenders. So, 
there was a very tight regulation of the merchant-moneylenders simply because the government wanted 
taxes. The merchant-moneylender was free to make money in any way that he pleased as long as he paid 
the government the taxes due on his profits. 

At times the activities of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were limited by a system of 
permits regulating trade. One clay tablet reads: "We interrogated the tamkarum as to whether he carried 
a royal permit and then allowed him to pass. The tamkarum who does not carry a royal permit, we send 
back to Babylon." [ 161 ] Thus, the very close connection between the government and the businessman 
can be seen in that without government permits, they could not venture outside of the checkpoints 
and boundary way-stations. The trade routes by river, sea and land were carefully guarded. Once 
again remember, it was not just for making a profit that the trade routes were so vital to Mesopotamia, 
everything that they needed had to be imported. Food, they had in abundance. Water, sunshine, mud and 
fertile soil gave them the basic necessities of Life. But all other raw materials had to be brought in from 
other countries. 

From the earliest times, the merchants and moneylenders had an importance to sustaining 
Mespotamian civilization far out of proportion to their actual worth as citizens. Rather than working 
along with their fellow men as equal cogs in the wheels that turn civilization, the merchants and money- 
lenders insinuated themselves into a controlling position in society. Unlike the controls exerted by the 
kings who theoretically were in power for the benefit of the People, and unlike the controls exerted by 
the priests who theoretically were in power as servants of the gods and the People, the merchants and 
moneylenders exerted control over kings, temples and people strictly for their own acquisitive and selfish 
benefit. Any bowing to the kings or genuflecting to the gods by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
basically had but one goal - hiding their treason to both kings and People behind an outer show of 
loyalty. And yet, even the merchant-moneylenders believed in the gods. 

It was not enough simply to have silver and want to be a merchant or a moneylender, it also 
required family connections and the permission of the king in the form of a royal permit. Because the 
greatest profits are derived from restricted and monopoly arrangements, not everyone who wanted one, 
could get a permit. Only if one had silver and had the family connections to a tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] guild could one enter into business - and a very ruthless and deadly business it was. 

As was previously shown, money lending inevitably produced debt-slaves as a side-product. If 
the moneylender did not want to deal with such slaves as he had acquired through foreclosure, he could 


sell them to those merchants who specialized in slave-trading. But it was not good for business to keep 
the debt-slaves around as a reminder to the slave's loving relatives of the ruthless nature of the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders]. So, the debt-slaves of Babylon became an international commodity as the 
moneylenders sold their own people as slaves to foreign nations. As slavery became an international 
trade, the advantages to the merchant-moneylenders to ship the dispossessed people out of the country 
and to immigrate foreign land buyers into the country became clear. Land was vacated for new buyers 
while removing the victims from the scene so they could not tell any warning tales to the new buyers 
(and future debt-slaves) of how they had fallen into slavery. Thus, international trade in slaves created 
profits for the local tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families as well as for their relatives in the 
surrounding countries. Slavery was a family business. Slaves in those days were not Negroes; they were 
Semites and Indo-Europeans. 

Besides dealing in slaves, the tamkarum also organized trade in such commodities as foodstuffs, 
wool, timber, garments and textiles, grain, wine and ale, metals, building materials such as reeds and 
bricks, cattle and donkeys. Anything and everything that could be bought and sold was grist for the 
moneymaking mill of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. Many letters of the Old Babylonian 
period refer to internal trade in such commodities, and show that this trade was then, as at all periods in 
Babylonia, largely river borne. [ 162 ] 

The merchant-moneylender was not only a merchant himself, but also a merchant banker, 
providing money for others to go on trading journeys for him. Here again the laws of Hammurabi take 
notice of the situation, laying down regulations for the relations between the merchant-moneylender 
and his agents. On the normal type of loan made by a merchant-moneylender to an agent for a trading 
journey, the merchant-moneylender could reckon on a minimum profit of 100%. [ 163 ] This minimum 
profit was paid to him if his agent did not make a profit on the business for which the loan was made. 
Thus, if the agent did poorly, the moneylender still made a 100% profit. This agreement encouraged 
the second tier agents to be as ruthless as possible in business dealings so as to make enough to pay the 
merchant-moneylender 100% (or whatever rates were agreed upon) and still have enough left over for 
his own profit. [ 164 ] There were also loans called tadmiqtum in which, if the agent made a loss on the 
enterprise, he simply returned the full capital sum to the merchant-moneylender. In this type of loan it is 
likely that any profit was shared in a fixed proportion between the agent and the moneylender. [ 165 ] 

So, you see, not only were the Babylonian merchants and moneylenders routinely and 
traditionally as well as legally, gathering in profits of 100% and greater but they were also guaranteed 
to at least get their money back on a bad deal. Either the agent returned the loaned money or else the 
agent, himself, could be enslaved. Without a doubt, once the Semitic Amorites became the masters of 
Mesopotamia, business in Babylonia became exceedingly sharp. 

One of the aspects of Babylonian business practices that seems to have been overlooked by the 
archeologists is how these kinds of interest rates could have endured for so long. The Laws of Hammurabi 
were not declared by him simply to right wrongs or to protect the People or to prohibit excesses or to fix 
commercial rates or to set limits on the price of goods - although they did all of these things - but also to 
protect the monopoly of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender]. 

And why? Because it is impossible in a free-enterprise system for moneylenders to make a profit 
of 100% or more on a loan! In a free enterprise system, where anyone can loan money at interest, the best 
way to make a profit on loans is to offer loans at a rate of interest below that of the other moneylenders 
and thus attract more borrowers. In a free enterprise system, the biggest moneylenders can actually 
afford to offer loans below those of the less wealthy moneylenders. And the less wealthy moneylenders 
can increase their profits by undercutting the competition from the richer moneylenders. Both situations 
arise in a free enterprise system. But as was earlier shown, this did not happen. It did not happen 
because throughout Mesopotamia, money lending rates were standardized by the tamkarum [merchant - 


moneylender] guilds. Money lending was a cartel monopoly that extended beyond the borders of any one 

Also, the Laws of Hammurabi show that Babylonia did not have a free-enterprise system because 
it was a system that was regulated so that the merchants could not take total control of prices and thus 
drive the People completely into poverty. And it was a system where the interest rates were officially fixed 
so that such high moneylender rates were legitimatised by the king, himself. This was Secret Fraud #17 of 
the Sumerian Swindle: "Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those 
very kings must be sacrificed." The king, who was representative of the gods, legitimatised the swindles 
of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] by writing a law declaring their frauds to be "legal". But 
simultaneously, the laws put a limit on their voraciousness. 

Even more than this, Hammurabi's Laws show that this merchant-moneylender class, over 
the centuries, through their guilds and cartels and through their financial bribery of the various kings 
and dynasties, had ingratiated themselves so much into this early society of Mankind that there were 
actual laws that protected their businesses from competition. By Babylonian times, business could not 
be practiced either on a local or an international scale without the permission of the kings and his tax 
collectors or without official warrants. Thus, in Babylonian times, although the merchant-moneylenders 
had a huge opportunity for enormous profits, they were still limited in their greed by the laws of the kings 
on the one side and the censure of the priests on the other. Between these two ameliorating forces of 
palace and temple, they did their best to suck the wealth out of the People. Though they could not receive 
much support from the temple priests whose main objective was serving God, they did receive much 
support from the palace whose main objective was maintaining power in the increasingly hostile political 
environment of the ancient Near East. 

Excessive rates of interest were frowned upon, and the laws of Hammurabi provide that a 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] who charged more than the legal rate would forfeit his capital. Still, 
these legal rates were extremely high and guaranteed huge profits as well as much power over the People 
who fell into the moneylender's snare. Hammurabi did, however, prohibit the ancient Sumerian Swindle 
of stealing a man's property or enslaving him if he didn't have silver but did have trade goods to repay the 

Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with 
silver, forfeit the collateral." But under Hammurabi, this part of the Sumerian Swindle was recognized 
as a swindle and declared illegal. But neither Hammurabi nor any other king nor anyone who was not a 
merchant-moneylender, recognized the entire Sumerian Swindle for what it was, simply because it "had 
always been here." 

Hammurabi's Laws decreed that: 

■ "If a man who has acquired a debt has no silver to return but has grain, then the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] shall take the interest on it in grain, but if the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] raises the interest on it above 100 qa of grain per gur (33 percent) he has delivered 
(on loan), he shall forfeit whatever loan that he made". 

Thus, the moneylenders could be assured of high profits but a limit of 33% was the law. And with 
their interest rates being written into law, they could claim to an illiterate peasant that such high rates 
were not only "routine" but were also decreed by the king. The people could thus be swindled legally. This 
was very important to the moneylenders to legitimatize their frauds under protections of the king and 
his soldiers but woe to the king who did not know Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle: "Kings are 
required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed." 
The kings did not know the Sumerian Swindle otherwise they would have executed the moneylenders for 



The rates of interest payable on loans varied according to the period of Babylonian history and 
the commodity involved. In the Old Babylonian period it was commonly 33 per cent on barley and 20 
per cent on silver. It is often not very clear in the documents of the Old Babylonian period what the term 
of the loan was, nor is it explicitly stated whether payment of interest was monthly or annual. Generally 
the loan would be until after the coming harvest-time or until the conclusion of the trading journey in 
connection with which it had been made. But one thing is clear: the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] 
had devised a variety of ways of scamming people out of their wealth through the loaning of both silver 
and commodities. 

And all of these swindles relied upon a written contract as a means of binding their victims to 
an agreement that was witnessed by both man and gods. Every bargain necessitated the calling in of a 
public scribe. The bill, drawn up before witnesses on a clay tablet, enumerated the sums paid out, the 
names of the parties, the rate percent, the date of repayment, and sometimes a penal clause in the event 
of insolvency. The tablet remained in the possession of the creditor until the debt had been completely 
discharged. It was the creditor who kept the tablet as proof that the borrower owed him a debt. The 
borrower often gave as a pledge either slaves, a field, or a house, or certain of his friends would pledge 
on his behalf their own personal fortune; at times he would pay with his own labor the interest which he 
would otherwise have been unable to meet. And the stipulation was previously made in the contract of 
the number of days of corvee which he should periodically fulfill for his creditor. If, in spite of all this, 
the debtor was unable to procure the necessary funds to meet his engagements, the principal became 
augmented by a fixed sum - for instance, one third - and continued to increase at this rate until the total 
value of the phantom interest reached that of the security. 

It is easy to see, from the contracts of the Assyrian or Babylonian Empires, how in this 
manner the original sum lent became doubled or trebled in phantom amounts. Generally, the interest 
accumulated till it was quadrupled. The small tradesman or free workman, who by some accident had 
become involved in debt, seldom escaped this progressive impoverishment except by strenuous efforts 
and incessant labor. [ 166 ] Does this sound familiar to you modern people who have fallen victim to the 
Sumerian Swindle through the modern bankers' frauds of mortgage loans and credit card debt? If you 
wonder why you work so much and yet still owe so much to the moneylenders, then you are a modern 
day victim of the Sumerian Swindle. 

As those farmers and workers sweated under the hot sun, working to pay off the loans-at- 
interest to the fat moneylenders who sat in the shade sipping iced drinks, their hatred for the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] grew. Ice was carted down from the mountains in the winter and kept in ice 
houses insulated with straw so that the awilum [the Haves] could enjoy cold drinks in the summer even 
as the tenant farmers and debt-slaves sweated in the 120 degree heat. 

Again remember, these ancient people were not less intelligent than we are in modern times. 
And when it came to turning a profit, most of the swindles being perpetuated by modern bankers and 
financiers today were invented in Mesopotamia over 5,000 years ago. Every single modern financial scam 
today is based upon two baskets of grain producing three. The formula, I=Prt, Interest equals Principle 
times Rate times Time, was just as big a swindle in the ancient days as it is today. And the merchant- 
moneylenders of ancient times were just as clever at stealing money as the bankers are today. And upon a 
foundation laid by those ancient swindlers, is based the entire modern banking and financial systems of 
fraud and grand larceny. 

For example, one very common type of loan, known as a hubuttatu loan, has often been assumed 
to mean an interest-free loan. However, the moneylenders only gave interest-free loans to one another 
or to those whom they intended to manipulate and betray. An hubuttatu loan denoted a loan in which 
the amount received by the borrower was less than the amount entered in the contract, the difference 


representing the interest payable. If such a loan was not repaid within the time period originally agreed 
upon, then interest on the amount stated in the contract became due in the normal way. 

The following contract provides an example of such a transaction: 

"Shamash-Nasir the governor, son of Sin-Iqisham, has received from Ilushu-Nasir and Nanna- 
Ibni, 133 gur, 1 pi, 4 sutu of grain as a hubuttatu loan. For two years there shall accrue no interest. If he 
has not returned the grain by the third year, then he shall add interest". The names of witnesses follow, 
together with the date. This odd amount of grain mentioned represents a real loan of 100 gur plus interest 
of exactly 33 and one-third per cent over two years, since 1 gur = 5 pi = 30 sutu . 

At first, it may not seem relevant to the theme of this book to discuss these kinds of business 
practices but it will all tie together as you begin to notice how these business transactions were 
guaranteed and adhered to. These agreements and payment schedules were fixed in dried or in fired 
clay tablets as business contracts. You already know this but think about it more carefully as the notion 
of contracts, agreements , decrees and laws are later used to brainwash and enslave entire nations. 
Remember, the Mesopotamians used written contracts as a means of guaranteeing adherence to an 

The primary condition for the validity of most commercial transactions (including loans) was 
the presence of witnesses and a written record in the form of a contract. It is specified in the laws of 
Hammurabi that loans made without a contract and witnesses could not be recovered. Thus, a contract 
was required by law. An apparent exception to this general principal occurs at about this time in the 
Assyrian merchant colony in Cappadocia where a type of loan called ebuttu was known. This could be 
transacted without either witnesses or a contract and which carried no interest. This, however, was a 
very specialized situation, as these loans were made between members of the same merchant colony all 
of whom knew and trusted each other's credit. And these loans were made within the same tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] guild. In other words, from the very earliest times, the merchant-moneylenders 
would, within their own guilds, provide interest free financing to one another. Guild members protected 
one another from falling into poverty from the variety of bad luck or political storms that could wipe out 
a man's investments, silver or goods. Such interest-free loans gave guild members the access to ready cash 
to take advantage of investment opportunities as they arose. These tamkarum guilds had reached such 
a level of commercial sophistication and guild-member loyalty by 1750 BC, as to provide interest-free 
loans to their members without a contract and backed by their verbal assurances alone . Make note of this 
for future reference. 

Tablets recording commercial contracts were usually sealed with the cylinder seals of those 
concerned, or in the later period with the mark of a fingernail. This clay contract was often then enclosed 
in a clay envelope containing a duplicate text whereby falsification was rendered impossible since the 
envelope would not be broken unless a dispute arose. At such a time, the protected text within the clay 
envelope would be taken as the official version of the contract. [ 167 ] 

Again, it was the written contract which kept business dealings intact just as written contracts 
do in modern times. However, unlike modern times where everybody can read and write, in the ancient 
days, reading and writing was accomplished by an elite few. Most of the kings could not read or write 
and those few kings who could do so, bragged about it with inscriptions on their palace walls. The 
vast majority of the People delegated this task as well as any complicated arithmetic problems to the 
professional scribes who had learned the complicated cuneiform script through many years of intense 

Even 1,500 years after its invention, for the common people writing was still as mysterious as the 
clouds in the sky or the rising of the sun. To the common people, if something was written on the clay 
tablets, tablets that could last thousands of years after the writer and all of the witnesses had turned into 
dust, then there was something both eternal and true about such writing. The clay tablets could record 


agreements that transcended time. Indeed, these clay tablets did transcend time - even if the writing on 
some of them was not true. 

Falsification or forgery of tablets was on occasions attempted, but was a serious crime. Even 
though the tablets were normally of unbaked clay, it was difficult to moisten the clay at the appropriate 
point only, obliterate the old inscription without damage to the remainder, and then superimpose the 
new text. Forgery of a complete tablet was sometimes attempted, but this required the collusion of a 
competent scribe. [ 158 ] 

Such cases are of interest not just for insight into the ancient mentality but as indications of the 
criminal nature of some of our ancient ancestors. In matters of crime or legal disputes, the Sumerians 
and Babylonians were quick to resort to the judges for a settlement. For them, the law was something 
decreed by the king and since the king was given his kingship by the gods, then there was a sanctity 
attached to the law that gave it a religious tinge. In fact, this godly aspect of the law was a permanent part 
of Mesopotamia culture from the most ancient times. Oaths were taken swearing upon the wrath of the 
gods. And it is often recorded in the tablets how various parties would often refuse to take the oath "for 
fear of the gods". Or when a decision could not be reached by the judges or by the king, the intervention 
of the gods was resorted to and the litigants were given the "River Ordeal" as a proof from the gods as 
to which had the righteous cause. Truth was "determined" by which one of the two parties drowned 
and which one survived immersion into the river. Both were given an equal amount of time underwater 
through the use of a water clock. But the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had the advantage of 
being immersed second, since they were the ones being sued in court. It was a simple matter to bribe a 
judge to make the hole in the water clock smaller so that the poor litigant would be submerged for a fatal 
length of time. The cuneiform tablets show many times how the poor people refused to accpet the river 
ordeal, knowing that they would be killed, thus, conceding their case to the moneylenders. 

With all of the petty squabbles and major cases of personal and pecuniary injury that the People 
brought for a decision, it was impossible for the king to handle it all and still maintain administrative 
control over the kingdom. It was just too much work for one man. So, from the earliest Sumerian times 
and throughout Babylonian and Assyrian times, the kings appointed judges to make determinations 
regarding the laws and litigation before the law. Since the laws were relatively few in number, the judges 
had a lot of leeway in interpretation of those laws. As you will see in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, 
regarding the judges of the Jews, this office had a special power and reason for its existence. And this 
office of judge has really not changed very much in the past 5,000 years. 

The ancient judges, just as our modern judges, were not representatives of some ideal like "Truth" 
or "Justice" or "Fairness Among Men", although this was part of what their office claimed to uphold. 
The ancient judges, like our modern ones, were arms of the law and functionaries of the regime. Their 
job was, and is, not to dispense "justice" in its purest sense but rather to weigh the claims of the litigants 
against the existing laws of the state. As creatures of the state, a judge determines the validity of a 
litigant's claims in relation to the decrees of the state. A judge does not weigh a litigant's claims on their 
own merits since this would give the judge the right to make law. A judge does not make law but rather 
enforces existing law. In such a position, he is merely acting as a petty king, doing what the king, himself, 
would approve. There were no lawyers in the ancient times nor juries standing between the People and 
the law. So, the People had to deal directly with the judges and with no one else. A judge in those ancient 
days had the power to interpret the law and to make decisions on cases. The judge's decision was final, 
although difficult cases could be deferred to the king and appeals could be made directly to the king 

The people of Mesopotamia were a very litigious people and very protective of their rights and 
possessions. Arguments over land boundaries, inheritances, loan agreements and the countless reasons 
that modern people everywhere find for disagreeing with one another, were just as liable to provide them 
with plenty of reasons to squabble. When two or more people could not agree over some property or 


personal problem, they would take their fight to the judges for a decision. The clay tablets are filled with 
the records of these ancient legal decisions recorded by the court scribes. 

However, there was no Akkadian word for "court," that is, there was no special "court building" 
used exclusively for that purpose like in modern times. The case was brought before a judge or benches 
of judges who sat at the gate or in the temple courtyard. These judges were appointed by the king from 
among his trusted followers. Or they could be appointed from among the elders of the city. They received 
a regular ration of food and garments as payment for their services. Some of them, known as "judges of 
the king," also were responsible for administrative duties. 

By the beginning of Hammurabi's Old Babylonian period, some men were given the professional 
title of "judge." Judges were expected to display high standards of professional conduct, as noted in the 
Code of Hammurabi: 

■ "If a judge tried a case and made a decision and had a sealed document executed, but later 
changed his judgment, they will convict that judge of changing his judgment. He will pay 
twelve times the claim involved in that case, and they will remove him in the Assembly from his 
judgment seat, and he will not sit in judgment with the judges again." 

Thus, Hammurabi limited the power of the judges from having the power of a king to change his 
mind or of being bribed. 

A good deal is known about the administration of justice in Babylonia. There were court officials 
who ensured that the court's decision was executed. The Old Babylonian courts had a sheriff (literally, 
"soldier") whose duties included such things as recovering property or bringing a baby to court to record 
its birth. Another official attached to the court was a barber. One might find it peculiar to have a barber 
attached to a court of law until you realize that when a moneylender brought a debtor into court or a 
debtor denied the validity of the debt by demanding a court determination, if the debtor lost the case 
he could be enslaved. Upon the judge ruling in the moneylender's favor, it was the barber who gave to 
the newly-decreed slave the hair cut characteristic of their status. The barber also performed the task 
of destroying tablets nullified by a royal edict. It was the custom in Mesopotamia to thoroughly destroy 
nullified tablets by pounding and stomping them back into the dust from which they came, leaving no 
trace. Destruction of legal documents was as ancient an act as writing them in the first place. And the 
advantages to themselves of destroying evidence and of leaving no trace of a document was not lost on 
the merchant-moneylenders. 

A herald also was an official at the court; his duties involved announcing official information. It 
was the herald who publicized the loss of a cylinder seal and its dates, so any documents sealed after that 
date would be deemed invalid. He also advertised a runaway slave, announced government conscriptions, 
and along with the sheriff (a soldier) presided over foreclosed house sales. The herald needed the sheriff 
(soldier) to accompany him since the foreclosed home owners often resorted to violence against the 
moneylenders who were stealing their houses. Murder trials traditionally were the king's domain. 

Innumerable Sumerian, Babylonian, and Assyrian legal documents have been excavated. All 
major business transactions and agreements required a contract. Legal documents recorded purchases, 
employment, and exchange of goods and property. In addition, there were partnership deeds, gifts, 
deposits, and debt certificates, marriage and adoption contracts as well as inheritance documents. [ 169 ] 
Only the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds used verbal promises between their guild members 
without resorting to written contracts. Writing was held in such high esteem that the existence of a 
written document was accepted as proof that an agreement had been made between two parties. This 
narrow and rather superstitious view of what writing is and what writing does, was to be fraudulently 
exploited by the moneylenders of Babylon in the following centuries. This theme is more fully explained 


in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon. 

By the time of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC), the practice of paying palace dependants by the 
distribution of rations had been largely replaced by the allotment of grants of land, generally held by 
virtue of the performance of certain military or civil duties. This system of labor service became vital 
to the Old Babylonian economy, providing reserves of ready labor and military personnel, ensuring the 
performance of services essential to the state, and as a very efficient means of farming the land. This 
system, known as ilkum [military land grant], is found in both the Old Babylonian and the ensuing 
Kassite periods. Although "fief" is a convenient English term for rendering the Babylonian word, which 
signifies both service and grant, no idea of a feudal relationship between the king and his tenants should 
be read into the Babylonian institution. Such a grant might be made to an individual or a group and 
several ilkum might be held by one person. The "fief" [ilkum] was reckoned in days of service, and in 
some cases it was possible to provide a substitute to carry out some or all of the relevant duties. The 
length of time required in service to the king is uncertain, but there are indications that relatively short 
periods may have been involved. The possession of a ilkum, despite the burdens attached to it, was highly 
valued. As farm land, it not only provided food and wealth to the owner but such ownership elevated 
that owner to the social level of awilum [the Haves]. Many of Hammurabi's letters deal with complaints 
received from tenants saying they had been wrongly kept out of or evicted from their ilkum . Other 
letters are concerned with the granting of ilkum , fixing of boundaries, neglect of land, etc. They mention 
numerous craftsmen and professional men who are holders of ilkum : archers, shepherds, bakers, smiths, 
jewelers, cobblers, singers and soothsayers. [ 170 ] But as explained below, the ilkum [military land grant] 
was a sort of official swindle. 

Although Hammurabi's fame is securely ensured by the numerous records of his just 
administration, by the histories recorded on the clay tablets found in his library and by his Law Code, he 
was not the only king with administrative skills. To the north in Assyria, Shamshi-Adad's administration 
was also highly organized with governors appointed over the various districts under his control. 
Permanent garrisons were stationed in the towns throughout Mesopotamia and additional troops were 
levied for each campaign, both from the settled population and from the nomads. 

The letters of Hammurabi provide much insight into other branches of administration and 
the functioning of the community in general. Most striking is the time and labor devoted to public 
works, especially the maintenance of canals which served both to provide water and as a major means 
of transport. The wealth of the king and the temples, which was considerable, included land and flocks 
and herds. The letters show that the governors of the larger cities were responsible for the animals 
pastured in their districts, and that both royal and temple herds were placed under the same chief 
shepherd. Accounts were rendered to Hammurabi himself, showing that at least in some instances the 
king controlled the collection of the temple revenues as well as his own. Tax collectors unable to exact 
their full dues were forced to make up the deficit themselves. So, these tax collectors were by necessity a 
ruthless group. The king kept a close eye on his officials, and there are letters in which the latter defend 
themselves to him against charges of negligence. [ m ] 

Going to war with a neighboring village or city or state, required soldiers. From its earliest 
existence as a tribal society to the grander scale of dynasties that ruled large sections of countryside, these 
warriors were drawn from the general populace as they were needed. Throughout the Sumerian period, 
the required warriors were either volunteers who had been excited into a battle fever by the harangues 
of the kings and priests or volunteers who had leaped to the defenses by the emergency of foreign 
attack. Otherwise, they were conscripts who had been drafted under duress from among the farmers 
and townspeople. When the emergency was over, the survivors returned to their occupations of tilling 
the fields and attending to their trades. Warfare was a seasonal occupation and whenever possible was 
avoided during the times of sowing and harvest or during the nastier weather patterns of rain or heat. 


These ordinary farmers were only part time warriors as needed. 

It was not until the Semitic Dynasty of Sargon the Great (2374-2239 BC) that a regular profession 
was developed for a full time warrior on duty as part of a standing army. His payment of rations was 
taken from the taxes levied on the farmers and merchants and so it was a continuing expenditure from 
the king's treasury. 

During Hammurabi's Dynasty (1792-1750 BC), with the swindling moneylenders and their 
relatives in the slave trade even more firmly in control of the wealth of the state, a new method of 
"paying" the soldiers was developed by giving them their own parcels of farm land. A soldier could still 
expect rations and loot during a campaign, but afterwards, instead of merely being dismissed and sent 
back into society to make a living as best he could, this new method of conscription was devised to keep 
him in a state of perpetual service. [ 172 ] During times of peace, this exchange of land ownership in return 
for military service kept the soldier permanently ready to assume military duties as required. Although 
soldiers were allocated plots of land in return for military service throughout all of Mesopotamian 
history, the Babylonian ilkum [military land grant], had a unique twist. 

The ilkum [military land grant] was actually a very clever trick. Of course, no one can live without 
food. By giving the soldier his own plot of land to farm, he could grow his own food during times of 
peace while land ownership gave him a vested interest in defending the state and his own property in 
times of war. Also, as a landowner, he was automatically counted as among the awilum [the Haves]. So, 
his social status as well as his personal prosperity were enhanced in ratio to his hard work at producing 
a crop. Also, as a landowner, he paid taxes to the state, thus bringing profits to the king. And because the 
land did not cost the king anything, the soldier was induced to perform a vital function at no cost to the 
state other than whatever was required by the state to arm and feed him during actual war. It was a better 
deal for the king than for the soldier, but because Mesopotamian society was divided into the awilum [the 
Haves] and muskenum [the Have-Nots], all social prestige revolved around wealth and the ownership 
of property and the avoidance of indebtedness. Being able to grow your own food without working on 
someone else's farm for starvation wages, was the only other alternative besides slavery. As the Semitic 
moneylenders squeezed society, the well-fed and God-conscious times of Sumerian Culture became a 
distant and forgotten memory as the low wages and poverty became normal for the average citizen. So, 
these ilkum [military land grants] were much sought after and highly prized because they were the only 
way for the muskenum [Have-Nots] to quickly raise their social status and become awilum [Haves] . 

But the Babylonian Dynasty did not depend just on professional soldiers. Conscripts could be 
drafted from among the populace as required. If a citizen was conscripted for the royal campaign and 
failed to appear, he would be executed. So, by this time, the nasty and ruthless exigencies of war were well 
developed and enforced. 

For 1,500 years, the scheming moneylenders and landlords had been able to inveigle their 
neighbors into war - so profitable to themselves - while avoiding military service and combat, 
themselves. They could save their own lives by hiring a substitute from among the unemployed and 
starving poor whom they had defrauded. Hammurabi put a stop to this. In his Code, he forbade 
hiring substitutes to perform military duties. But even so, some cuneiform contracts have survived 
that prove that the wiley tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were still able to hire a substitute or 
barter commercial debts and credits to designate a substitute. The deceit, perfidy and cowardice of the 
moneylenders is proven in these ancient contracts. With their wealth and influence and criminal nature, 
they were above the law of the king, as long as they could devise some sort of subterfuge for evading the 

The military lists distinguished between soldiers, substitutes, and reserves. There were parallel 
systems of conscription for nomads, vassal states, foreigners, so that war service spread throughout 
all levels of society. But in spite of whatever laws Hammurabi and his successors decreed, during the 


Babylonian period and thereafter, no one but the moneylenders and priests were exempt from military 

To further tie the soldiers permanently into the Babylonian conscription system, the ilkum 
[military land grant] could be inherited by his children but could not be sold. As decreed in the code of 

■ "The field, orchard, or house of a soldier, a fisherman, or a state tenant will not be sold. If a 
man purchased a field, orchard or house of a soldier, fisherman, or a state tenant, his deed will be 
invalidated (literally, 'his tablet will be broken'), and he will forfeit his silver. The field, orchard or 
house will return to its owner." 

These laws show the importance to Babylon of keeping the soldiers and fishermen tied to a single 
location through land ownership. Fish was an important source of food and fishermen were (and still are) 
notorious for moving to wherever the fish are. Hammurabi did not want either of these two professionals 
to wander off or relocate where they couldn't be found. 

But, once again, the merchants and moneylenders had been able to inveigle an exception for 
themselves in the laws. While no other citizens were allowed to sell their ilkum plots of land, the naditum 
[priestess-moneylender] and tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] were allowed to do so. [ 173 ] They could 
do this as long as the buyer agreed to take over the obligations of an ilkum [military land grant] . But it 
should not be assumed that there was any religious reason for an exception in the law being made for 
these two social classes. The naditum [priestess-moneylender] and tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] 
were both practitioners of the Sumerian Swindle. Therefore, they had the silver enough to influence a 
king such as Hammurabi. 

Although naditum is often translated as "priestess", these women attached to the temples were 
involved in various kinds of business transactions and played an important role in Babylonian economic 
life, lending silver and grain, supplying capital for trading expeditions, and so forth. They were one of the 
conduits of wealth that the Sumerian Swindle brought into the temples. 

The naditum [priestess-moneylender] lived and worked in the gagum or "cloister", a compound 
associated with the temple. Like the merchant, she invested her money in houses and landed property 
that she rented out on lease. The naditum [priestess-moneylender], although she could marry, seems 
to have been under an obligation of celibacy. Despite certain ties and duties to the cloister, the naditum 
[priestess-moneylender], whose background was always to have been a daughter of the awilum [the 
Haves] , lived and functioned as a private individual. Evidence for this unique institution, which 
flourished in the Old Babylonian period, comes mainly from Sippar, where the cloister was attached to 
the Shamash temple. [ 174 ] Thus, the occupation of moneylender was a monopoly of the wealthy families 
that had penetrated as an organized and exclusive mycelium into every strata of society. Tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders], sabitum [alewife-moneylenders] and naditum [priestess-moneylenders], all 
practiced the same secrets of the Sumerian Swindle among their variety of social groups while offering 
identical loan rates. 

At the various temples, the moneylenders dedicated their daughters to the service of that god as 
sabitum [priestess-moneylenders]. And as a show of their "piety", they also offered their best sex slaves 
to the temple as holy prostitutes. Thus, the temples became subverted and corrupted by the daughters 
and the gifts of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . From the earliest times, the merchants and 
moneylenders were a moral degradation of society. They corrupted both palaces and temples just as they 
do in modern times. It was an important profit strategy for the moneylenders to install their daughters 
in the temples as priestesses because of Secret Fraud #6 of the Sumerian Swindle: "High morals impede 
profits, so debauching the Virtuous pulls them below the depravity of the moneylender who there-by 


masters them and bends them to his will." 

By Hammurabi's time, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] was very much in the control of 
both the palace as well as the temple whose money-lending was administered by the naditum [priestess- 
moneylender] . And to cheaply protect their wealth, they tied the soldiers to the land through the ilkum 
[military-land-grant]. The land had cost them nothing because they had swindled it from the poor or had 
captured it through warfare. 

Mention has been made of the important professions in Mesopotamia but there is one other 
ancient profession that was refined and regulated to its highest degree in Babylonia. This profession is 
not more than a footnote in the cuneiform and archeological records but it is as old as civilization, itself. 
In some ways, it can been said to be one of the basic building blocks of Babylonian society and it is still a 
major influence in modern times as well. 

The profession of tavern keeper has a long and valuable history. But it is a history that has never 
been recognized for what it is until now. Because it "has always been here", we tend to take the beer bar, 
tavern or cocktail lounge for granted even if we do not understand it's social, political and economic 
workings. The basic importance of the beer bar, tavern, and the cocktail lounge may be ignored in 
modern times, but looking back at the origins of this ancient institution will be of importance now as 
well as in later chapters. 

Once again, understand that the laws of any nation are written by those who have the power to 
write such laws; they are not written by the powerless or the poor. Because the Laws of Hammurabi gave 
special treatment to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and the naditum [priestess-moneylenders], 
we can get an insight into the relative power and influence these social classes had in those ancient times. 

However, in all law codes worldwide, a special exception under the law indicates a special 
power over the law And this special power was granted by the kings only to the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders]. The moneylenders could persuade the kings (whether through gifts or bribery or civic 
charity or emergency funds) to grant them special protection and special privileges and special status that 
no other class of people in society could enjoy. 

This special exception was also extended to another social class closely allied with the 
moneylender and merchant guilds, known as the sabitum or "alewife". The sabitum [alewife- 
moneylender] was a tavern-keeper engaged in the preparation and sale of intoxicating beverages, but it 
is clear that she dealt also with basic commodities in the manner of a small broker. Indeed in origin and 
etymology a "broker" denotes a retailer of wine (from "to broach" a cask). 

This occupation as a brewer of beer and seller of beer and wines was another tradition handed 
down from the Sumerians as being a female-only job. There are reasons why this profession was 
restricted to women alone. The sabitum [alewife -moneylender] not only brewed beer but she managed 
one or many taverns along with all of the other side-businesses that taverns create. Besides beer and wine 
sales and food service, taverns also could provide room rentals, horse and donkey stabling, and other 
traveler's accommodations. They were places of entertainment with music, dancing, poetry, song and 
prostitution, all quickened and fueled with draughts of beer and wine. 

Being the focal point not only of local farmers and towns people but also of weary and thirsty 
traveling merchants, the taverns were places of gossip and trade. A drunken merchant might make a 
good deal on some rare trade goods to a sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. Or the drunken farmers and 
local merchants might trade away their day's wages for just one more flaggon of beer. An alcoholic 
Mesopotamian laborer was no different than a modern drunk who might give away the last of his silver 
or his best garments or his wife's necklace of sea shells or trade the last of his rations of barley for just one 
more drink. Perhaps nursing a hangover, he did not remember it the next morning, but his thumb-print 
or the impression of his garment seam on the wet clay tablet was the sabitum's [alewife-moneylender's] 
guarantee that she would be paid. 


As in modern times, a man was more easily swindled out of his wealth when throwing the dice or 
guessing at straws when he was drunk. Just as the moneylenders knew how to steal from people simply 
because they could read and write and calculate arithmetic sums, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] and 
her relatives knew how to calculate the best ways of winning at dice and cheating at Three-Shells-and-a- 
Pea. And for any customer who became unruly for whatever reason, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] 
always had a muscular bouncer available to throw the bum out. 

With this kind of economic power and social influence, even with women's lower social prestige 
under Semitic rule, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was a well-respected and influential member of 
Babylonian society. She was not a mere bar-girl but was a powerful business operator. In fact, one of the 
most famous of Sumerian "alewives", Ku-Baba, founded one of the early dynasties at Kish. [ 175 ] Reflecting 
not only her own talents but also the higher esteem that women held in Sumerian society than they were 
ever to enjoy in Babylonian society, Ku-Baba was the only woman ever to rule a Mesopotamian city. 

Even so, the taverns of Babylon were places of debauchery just as most taverns are today. Loose 
morals and drunken foolishness was no different in those ancient times than can be experienced by 
any modern imbiber of alcoholic beverages today - except for one very important detail. In the days 
of ancient Sumer and Babylon, there were far fewer laws to restrain a citizen's selfishness, chicanery or 
carnal desires. And as far as moral restraints, the religions of those times encouraged a full enjoyment of 
Life since what promises there were of an Afterlife were nothing but the promise of eternal gloom in the 
darkness of the grave. 

Prostitution and sex-slavery was just one of the special relationships that the sabitum [alewife- 
moneylender] had with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] . She was not necessarily a prostitute, 
herself, but she was certainly a supplier of whores to her customers. Archeological digs have unearthed a 
variety of bas-reliefs, clay sculptures and erotic advertising plaques that had adorned the entryways of the 
various taverns. These depicted women in various nude poses laying enticingly on beds as well as graphic 
examples of the sexual services they offered to their male customers. 

Because the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] always had a surplus of debt-slaves under 
his yoke, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was a prime market for them. After abusing these poor, 
enslaved women, themselves, the moneylenders were the main providers of sex slaves to the taverns and 
whore houses across the entire ancient Near East. Thus, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] and 
the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] made a perfect business cartel. But it was not an equal partnership. 
The sabitum [alewife-moneylender] relied upon barley to brew her beer as well as upon the import 
merchants to supply her wine, both products were controlled by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] . 
The prostitutes she owned and hired out were also provided by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] . 
And when she could discover important political or economic information from drunken traders and 
travelers, it was the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] to whom she sold these vital tidbits. 

True, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] was an independent business woman but she was 
not supreme in her independence because her business was intertwined with and subservient to the 
machinations and power of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. And when the moneylenders 
wanted to spread rumors and agitate the People toward rebellion or to incite them to buy or sell their 
lands and crops under rumors of war, the taverns operated by the alewife was the prime origin of such 
propaganda and rumor mongering. 

Spreading news, rumors and lies among the people is quickly accomplished when they are 
gathered around the beer pot, gossiping and at their leisure. Thus, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] 
and her line of business became a integral part of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] cartel from 
even the very earliest Sumerian times. Moneylenders, pimps, war-mongers and booze merchants are 
ancient partners who have been conspiring together since before anyone can remember. 


The Mesopotamian Mafia and the Guild Wars 

As I stated in the beginning of this history, the Jews are no different than any other sort of 
organized criminal conspiracy. Or if there is any slight difference at all, it is simply that they have been 
more than usually successful at hiding their perfidious evil. How they have managed this, will be found in 
the following chapters and in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, and Volume III, The Bloodsuckers of 

But for now, you and I - with 2000 years of recorded history behind us - you and I can now 
stand on the highest ziggurats of baked clay and temple mounds of mud bricks of the Old Babylonian 
Dynasty of King Hammurabi. We can shade our eyes from the broiling sun with our protecting palms 
at our brows and gaze across the entire known world. From our lofty view across time and space, we 
can look up the Euphrates River or down the Tigris River, peer into the distant reaches of the Persian 
Gulf at Bahrain, Oman and distant India, strain our eyes to see into the wiggling mirages of the Syrian 
Desert or west into Canaan or northwest into Anatolia or southwest into Egypt or Arabia or across the 
Mediterranean Sea to Crete. But no matter where we look - now, at this point in world history, over 2000 
years after civilization began - there are absolutely no Jews to be found anywhere. 

No matter where we look in this time period of 1750 BC - from the reed swamps of the south 
where Sumerian civilization was born, to the northern plains of Assyria where much of history is 
soon to begin, across the deserts to the west where dwell the Canaanites and Egyptians or toward the 
Eastern Iranian plateau where the Elamites and Persians will soon begin their own mighty steps into the 
historical record - no matter where we look in the entire world, there are no Jews anywhere to be found. 
None. Zero. Nothing. 

How is this possible? Today's Jews hold aloft what they call their "holy scriptures" where-in 
they claim to be the original and the very first people to be created, even naming the original couple as 
Adam and Eve. Is there some mistake here? It is now 1750 BC. Civilization has been thrashing around 
for over 2,000 years without a single Jew making an appearance. In addition, the archeological record 
shows people living on the Earth during the Stone Age for millions of years previous to this. And when 
the Stone Age had a respite from the Ice Age, farming and civilization began in the flood plains of 
Mesopotamia and followed soon thereafter in the Nile River valley with the beginnings of the Egyptian 
civilization. But in all of this time, there were no Jews anywhere, under rocks, beneath trees, anywhere on 
the entire earth under the vast sky. Surely, the very people who make the biggest claims of being the very 
most holy and ancient people on earth - and, indeed, the original and very first people on earth - would 
not tell lies, would they? 

There were no Jews for all of those long periods of time but there were, however, some rather 
well-connected, rich and ruthless people working in the background who were not Jews. Rich, 
ruthless and well-connected they were, but they were not Jews - yet. They were tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders]; they were naditum [priestess-moneylenders]; they were sabitum [alewife-moneylenders] . 
And along with their relatives who helped them oversee their vast land holdings, monopoly business 
enterprises and myriads of slaves, they all belonged to the social class of the awilum [the Haves]. None of 
them were Jews because Jews and Judaism had not yet been invented. They were tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] but they were not Jews, yet. 

In the ancient days, sons were expected to follow the occupation of their fathers; and daughters 
were expected to accept a good match and to marry into mutually beneficial families. Families worked 
as family groups and there was very little room in society for individuals making their own way without 
help. Our modern concepts of the "rugged individual" was unknown because such "rugged individuals" 
would have perished in those ancient societies. In those days, everyone lived communally with the 
help of their family, friends and neighbors. Without such a social safety net, the lone individual had 


little chance of survival. So, the son of a farmer became a farmer. The son of a tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] either became a tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] or he managed one of the family 
businesses. Thus, the family enterprises prospered without interruption. 

All of these tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] businesses were extended family operations. 
Large families of wealthy men who would perhaps also have a second wife and several concubines along 
with all of their children plus the many relatives on both sides of the family, always had many mouths 
to feed and many jobs to fill. More children meant that more jobs were needed to satisfy the increasing 
size of the family and to perpetuate and increase family wealth. Thus, as family sizes grew, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] patriarchs sought greater control of existing markets and expansion into 
foreign markets. They ruthlessly practiced Secret Fraud #8: "Large crime families are more successful 
than lone criminals or gangs; international crime families are the most successful of all." 

A moneylender could teach his sons the secrets of the Sumerian Swindle, but by its very nature it 
had to remain a secret among the very few. The Secret was simple, but it was a secret none-the-less. The 
Sumerian Swindle was not something that was shared among every member of the moneylender families. 
The secret of the Sumerian Swindle was shared only with the most loyal sons who were to take over the 
moneylending side of the business. Not all sons were taught unless they were directly working in the 
racket. Much like modern day Mafia, Yakusa, Triad and Banker crime families do today, they employed 
numerous relatives in legal businesses while only a very few of the inner circle were entrusted with the 
secret, illegal side of the operations. So, most of these relatives could work in the family business doing 
the necessary tasks and enjoying the excessive profits without ever learning the secrets of the Sumerian 
Swindle. Lending silver and grain at interest had "always been here" so why would they question it? 

There were always a variety of jobs that the numerous other relatives of a tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] family were required to do. A tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] dealt in a variety of 
side businesses besides the money lending racket. So, he always had a variety of positions that needed to 
be filled by trusted employees. And who could be more trusted than a relative who needed a job and who 
wanted to share in the richness of the spoils? 

A tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] could not possibly manage his great wealth, his 
various business deals, his large estates with their tenant farmers and indentured servants and slaves 
while overseeing the work of his numerous debt-slaves all by himself. He needed help. And his most 
trustworthy help was found among his own family, his own relatives, his own tribe. From the very earliest 
of times, the business swindles, the property confiscations, the management operations and the slave 
system of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were family operations. Like the modern day Mafia 
and Gypsy crime families, the profits were shared with the entire extended family and clan leaving no one 
out. All of them were not equally guilty of committing crimes, but all of them were beneficiaries of those 
crimes that their patriarchs and tribe members had committed. The source of their wealth was never 
discussed with anyone not of their family and tribe. Telling the secrets of the family business was taboo. 
Because they all benefited in the profits, they all benefited by keeping their mouths shut, doing what they 
were asked to do, and protecting their clans from outsiders. 

As an individual, there is more silver to be made working for a rich uncle as an overseer of his 
many professional shepherds who cared for his numerous flocks than could be earned merely as the hired 
shepherd overlooking those goats. So, with a higher wage to be earned by working for a rich relative than 
by working for a stranger, the numerous family members of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] 
were always eager to lend a hand in the business and to enjoy membership in the social class of the 
awilum [the Haves] . To do otherwise, would mean banishment to the farthest fringes of the tribal family, 
perhaps becoming one of the muskenum [the Have-Nots] or even a wardum [a slave]. In tribal societies, 
the lone individual had very little chance of survival. It was the entire family and tribe who worked 
together for mutual benefit that prospered. This is how it "has always been". 


The Semitic goat rustlers of Mesopotamia always had very large families. And because of their 
genealogical organization, everyone knew the hierarchical position of everyone else. Order and discipline 
was maintained both because the father or patriarch was head of the family and head of the clan but also 
because the patriarch had control of the family businesses and portioned out the shares in the form of 
high wages to family members and low wages to the strangers who served the family members. 

Silence about their dealings, was foremost. The Sumerian Swindle was the basis of their power but 
how this secret money-making engine could be used to enhance all other aspects of their operations was 
equally under the family only need-to-know. With the shekels of silver gained through moneylending, 
the loan-sharking side of their operations required that they also have under their employ a variety of 
enforcers to help them extract payments from those who were unable or unwilling to pay. These strong- 
arm gangsters did not have to be members of the family; they only needed to do what they were told, 
such as dragging a screaming child away from his parents or a wailing daughter away from an indebted 
father who drank too much or gambled too much in the tavern of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. 
Debt-slavery was an accepted social disability in Hammurabi's Babylonia because "it had always been 
here". But it could not exist without the moneylenders insisting that it exist. They were parasites who lived 
and prospered under the protection of the king. 

And so, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class were not just wealthy businessmen who 
dealt in the usual goods of commerce and industry. They were not just the rich and respected members 
of the wealthy awilum class [the Haves] whose members included the kings and court officials and the 
priests and priestesses of the temples, but they were also something quite worse. Of course, they had 
money and property gained through their numerous commercial businesses. But their wealth was also 
derived from the secret dealings of loan sharking, alcohol debauchery, gambling, prostitution, and 
slavery. All of these were part of the Old Babylonian moneylenders' scams of 1750 BC just as they are a 
part of the hidden business mix of our own modern day banking dynasties. As criminals, all of them had 
their own collection agents in the person of soldiers (police) and hired goons. But there is more. 

The moneylenders first gained their wealth through the Sumerian Swindle by taking advantage 
of both the rich and the poor through lending-at-interest. But their greatest victims were the poor who 
not only lost everything that they had, but their very freedom into slavery as well. The moneylenders 
ruthlessly took advantage of the poor and they were betrayers of trust. Pretending to be honest 
businessmen, they took advantage of the People's good faith through Secret Fraud #3: "Loans rely on the 
honesty of the borrower but not the honesty of the lender." Those who borrowed from them believed that 
the stated percentages were simple even while the covert compound interest drove them into servitude. 

The moneylenders of Babylon were also seducers of the innocent in that they debauched the girls 
and boys and young women whom they had wrested from their parents and husbands through debt- 
slavery and then used them for their own perverted desires. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
were rapists and pimps who prostituted those abused youths to the brothels and taverns under their 
control. Since Sumerian times, the moneylenders had been homosexual perverts who raped the boys 
whom they had seized and seduced their male slaves under threat of death or castration. Cruel perverters 
of the downtrodden were they. And they were traitors to the gods. 

As the various tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families vied with one another for profits and 
political leverage, they found that their gods were getting in the way. The Sumerian-Babylonian religions 
were composed of many gods each of whom lived in different cities and who had their own geographical 
regions of power separate from all other gods. Those ancient cities whose temples had monopolized the 
worship of the most powerful gods, prospered the most. Nippur was still the holiest city in Babylonia 
as it had been for the previous 3,000 years of Ubaidian and Sumerian Culture. The Sumerian gods were 
the same gods worshipped by both the Babylonians and Assyrians. But the Semitic speaking Akkadians, 
Babylonians and Assyrians changed the names of the gods as the political influence of the temples began 


to shift away from Sumeria and toward Babylonia and Assyria. 

Inanna , the Sumerian goddess of love, became identified with the Semitic name of Ishtar, whose 
visible form was the planet Venus, the morning and evening star. She absorbed many attributes which 
originally had belonged to a number of other Sumerian goddesses, but her major aspects were those of 
goddess of love and of war. Cults of a sexual nature were practiced in her honor in many places. Those 
cults required a steady supply of sex slaves to serve the goddess and to bring income to the temple from 
the men who came to "worship" her via the temple prostitutes. Ishtar was also a goddess of war because 
war brought more slaves into the power of the merchant-moneylenders, slaves who could be used both 
for the personal sexual gratification of and the whore-house profits of their masters. 

Ishtar , as the planet Venus, is often thought of in a group with Sin, the Moon-god, and Shamash , 
the Sun-god. Because the Sun-god saw everything in his daily course above the earth, Shamash was the 
god of justice. There was a strong moral element in the cult of Shamash who was an unsparing enemy 
of the wrongdoer and who was a friend of the just and of the oppressed. A god often associated with 
Shamash was Adad, a storm-god who was originally of West Semitic origin [ 176 ] as the storm-god, Baal . 

Even with the changes of the names of the gods from Sumerian to the Semitic Old Babylonian 
language, the gods were still the same gods teaching the same lessons as had been taught for over 3,000 
years. Truth, integrity, uprightness, honesty and the benevolent justice of the gods was taught within 
the temples. Thus, the moneylenders were always at odds with the gods because by the very nature 
of the Sumerian Swindle, they could never do business and be honest both at the same time . Over 
the millennia, as their methods of making profits became more intertwined with a variety of socially 
corrosive occupations and criminal enterprises, not only did the moneylenders fall under the restrictive 
laws of the kings and the religious censure of the priests, but the moneylenders became absolutely 
the most hated people in all of Mesopotamia. So, to save their lives from the wrath of the People, they 
demanded extra protection under the laws of the king. 

To repeat once again, laws do not arise in a vacuum but they are promulgated as needed to meet 
the requirements of society or they are created to further the schemes of those who control society. The 
laws are made by the rich and powerful and never by the poor and powerless except in cases where the 
poor and powerless rise up and destroy the rich and powerful. Only then, do the poor make the laws. 

Of course, the crass impulses of the People have to be regulated so that everyone in Society can 
understand that deeds such as theft, rape, assault, murder, etc., are anti-social and socially destructive. 
So, such acts cannot be tolerated in society and are thus declared to be crimes. And yet, the Sumerian 
Swindle, itself, was never declared to be a crime simply because "it has always been here". The laws were 
written by the awilum [the Haves], the very people who profited, and they had no intention of making 
the Sumerian Swindle illegal. 

But laws also were developed to control the more subtle, but no less crass, deeds of the awilum 
[the Haves] so that their greed and deceit did not bring unbearable harm or suffering to the victims of 
their schemes and frauds. Certainly, the awilum [the Haves] cannot be trusted to fairly create just laws 
because it is in their very nature as members of the awilum class not only to have wealth but greedily to 
desire more. Conversely, the poor among the People cannot be trusted to fairly create laws because it is 
in their very nature to ignorantly not know what is best but rather to choose what fulfills their immediate 
and venal needs. 

Thus, it was recognized by all members of the ancient societies that only the king, under tutelage 
of the priests and guidance of the gods, would have the best interest of all the People at heart, both for the 
"Haves" and for the "Have-Nots". After all, the king was the servant of the gods and stood between the 
gods and the People, so it was his responsibility to "bring justice to the land". With the gods giving him 
authority, the king was an even more imposing figure when he was backed by his soldiers. 

Among all of the kings of the ancient Near East, Hammurabi was the most famous. Hammurabi 


(1792-1750 BC) was the sixth ruler of the First Dynasty of Babylon. So, he had plenty of help from 
previous kings in understanding how to best rule the region around Babylon that he had inherited. The 
prologue to Hammurabi's Law Code stresses that because of his piety the gods appointed him as ruler of 
the people to perform the role of guardian and protector of the weak and powerless. 

The types of cases dealt with in the Laws of Hammurabi include judicial procedure, theft and 
robbery, slave sales and matters affecting slaves, agricultural and irrigation work and offences, pledges, 
debts, deposits and loans, real estate sales and rentals; marriage, matrimonial property and sexual 
offenses; inheritance, adoption and foster care; assault and bodily injuries; rates of hire for equipment, 
laborers and craftsmen; failure to complete contracted tasks; renters' and shepherds' liabilities; and goring 
oxen.[ 177 ] But for our present studies, I shall mainly direct the Reader to an inspection of the laws which 
indicate the growing menace and power of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class as it arose in 

As did the previous two thousand years of Mesopotamian Culture, the Laws of Hammurabi 
distinguished three classes of people, the awilum [the Haves], the muskenum [the Have-Nots] and the 
wardum [the slaves]. So, nothing had changed in the social structure of Mesopotamia in two thousand 
years. The people were still accepting their ancient culture as being the same "as it had always been." 
However, the power and wealth of the moneylenders had increased tremendously in those two millennia 
while the poverty and suffering of the people had deteriorated in like ratio. Through the centuries, 
successive generations of the People were so gradually impoverished that the actual methods for causing 
their poverty went unnoticed. The great difference between the awilum [the Haves] and the muskenum 
[the Have-Nots] was, of course, noticed by them. The stupendous luxury of the "Haves" over the grinding 
poverty of the "Have-Nots" was obvious to everybody. But the gradual impoverishment that had made it 
so, was not recognized as a growing financial cancer because it was accepted as "always having been here." 

Through their illiteracy, the People had no way of knowing that they were slowly being swindled 
and enslaved to the awilum [the Haves] as lifetime servants to the fraudulent money power of debt, 
usury, controlled wages and warfare. This was not some accident of history and finance or the results 
of some uncontrollable, Darwinian natural selection process (such as the writings of Professor Kevin 
MacDonald allege) because the moneylenders kept the account books and knew with precise craftiness 
how to squeeze the People for every shekel of silver and every man-hour of labor. The awilum [the 
Haves] left nothing to chance; they planned and schemed with vicious avarice. They knew how to swindle 
wealth. It was no accident of mindless evolution, but was a precise and willful application of intransigent 
greed and demonic cunning that was fueled with the astronomical profits of the Sumerian Swindle. 

Dozens of duplicates and extracts of Hammurabi's laws have been recovered from a variety of 
sites in Mesopotamia as well as commentaries, references to his laws in a first millennium catalog, and 
a bi-lingual Sumerian- Akkadian manuscript. Some of the manuscripts date to Hammurabi's immediate 
successors in the first Dynasty of Babylon, while others are copies from a thousand years later. This 
wide and varied evidence attests to the enduring popularity of the Laws of Hammurabi, which was both 
an influence on and a reflection of contemporary literary, political, as well as legal thought. [ 178 ] And 
as a "great law giver", whose laws circulated throughout the ancient Near East for so many centuries, 
Hammurabi was undoubtedly the model upon which the Semitic goat-rustlers and Babylonian 
moneylenders based their own heroic myths in the fable of Moses. But more about that, later. 

Hammurabi directed the political expansion of his empire and organized a complex, sophisticated 
government and military bureaucracy to administer it. He defeated powerful rival kingdoms and 
extended his political and diplomatic influence throughout the ancient Near East in an expansion rivaled 
only by that achieved by his early contemporary to the north, Shamshi-Adad of Assyria. [ 179 ] And, to give 
us a wider perspective of those people, it is from this same time frame that we have the Laws of Eshnunna 
to also consider. 


Eshnunna was an Amorite-controlled kingdom in the Dayala River region east of Babylon which 
flourished for about 250 years between the fall of the Third Dynasty of Ur (about 2000 BC) and the rise 
of Hammurabi s Babylonian Empire (1750 BC). Hammurabi incorporated that kingdom into his own 
empire and no doubt had read their laws before writing his own. It is the differences between the three 
major law codes of Ur-Nammu (Sumerian), Eshnunna (Sumerian-Semite) and Hammurabi (Semitic) 
that will give us vital clues to the changes that were taking place among the people who wrote those laws 
and the People who suffered under them. 

The Stele of Hammurabi, now in the Louvre, stands about seven feet six inches high. On the 
top of the monument is a carved bas-relief of the Sun-god, Shamash (the God of Justice), receiving the 
homage of King Hammurabi. Beneath this carving is engraved the cuneiform text of the Laws. The laws 
themselves are sandwiched between a prologue and an epilogue. 

The prologue begins with a claim that the gods called upon Hammurabi "to make justice visible in 
the land, to destroy the wicked person and the evil-doer, that the strong might not injure the weak." The 
prologue contains a series of titles in which Hammurabi boasts of his piety toward the gods and his care 
for their cities and shrines. The epilogue at the bottom of the stele speaks of the purpose of the writing 
down of the laws, which is "to set right the orphan and widow ... and wronged person", and goes on to 
recommend that succeeding rulers pay heed to Hammurabi's words, on pain of incurring the curses of 
the gods upon whom Hammurabi calls. The laws themselves consisted originally of about 280 sections, 
of which some thirty- five were erased from the stele in antiquity, presumably by the conqueror who took 
the monument to Susa. Fortunately, about half of the missing text can now be restored, partly from some 
diorite fragments which must have come from another monument of the same kind, and partly from clay 
tablets of various periods containing parts of Hammurabi's laws. These missing parts which I shall review 
later, give a valuable indication of what the Elamites disliked about Hammurabi's Laws. 

The modern translation and publication of the Laws of Hammurabi in 1948 AD, stirred up a 
violent controversy among the Jews and the Bible-believing Christians as well as among the atheists. The 
Jews were violently opposed to anything that shook their monopoly on the history of the ancient Near 
East. Since the establishment of the science of Assyriology in 1812, the boasts and grandiose claims of 
the Jews were slowly being whittled away by the discoveries of archeology. What the Jews were claiming 
in their own Old Testament as true stories of a wonderful gang of mighty Jewish kings and miracle- 
performing priests dwelling in their mountain fortress of Jerusalem, was, under archeological scrutiny, 
becoming increasingly the story of a bunch of petty tribal goat-rustlers and bandits hiding from their 
enemies in the rocky wilderness around Jerusalem. New discoveries in archeology were not to the 
advantage of the Jews because new evidence and historical verification tended to weaken their claims to 
greatness and to uncover their lies. So, the Jews opposed new discoveries that showed them to be liars 
and they welcomed new discoveries that perpetuated their deceits. 

Although the modern Christians did not have the major investment in myths and historical 
frauds as did the Jews, they tended to oppose the new discoveries of archeology if those discoveries 
shook their basic beliefs in the "infallibility of the word of God as found in the Bible". But, in general, 
the Christians welcomed the new discoveries as leading them to a better understanding of the Bible. The 
Christians tended to look to archeology as a means of proving the Biblical stories. But the Jews tended 
to accuse the archeologists and their discoveries as fakes and forgeries. This is a very different reaction 
of two Bible-based religions to the same discoveries. Why there was such a vast difference between the 
Christian and the Jewish reaction to archeological discoveries of the ancient Near East will become 
clearer in later chapters. 

Without any doubt the Laws of Hammurabi had been in existence several centuries before the 
period in which Moses allegedly lived. Also without any doubt, the laws of Hammurabi frequently 
legislated for the same kind of circumstances, sometimes in almost identical terms, as those laws, 


supposedly of divine origin, that were associated with the name of Moses. Direct borrowing is indicated. 
Orthodox theologians, mentally wriggling in embarrassment, sought to lie about it and to claim that, 
where similarities could not be denied, the Hebrew laws showed a "higher ethical content". Apparently, 
the Orthodox theologians' "holiness" gave them a special ability to see "a higher ethical content" that was 
not there in fact. 

The atheists and other opponents of religion gleefully argued that the Hebrew law giver (whether 
Moses or some later legislator plagiarizing that name) had simply taken over, in the name of his God, 
as much of the existing Babylonian laws as suited him, adapting it to the more primitive sociology of 
the Hebrew goat-rustlers. One such writer stated dogmatically: "if there be any relationship between 
the Hebrew and the Babylonian legislations, there is only one possible conclusion, and that is that the 
Hebrew was borrowed from the earlier Babylonian". [ 180 ] But the Hebrews did a lot more than just 
"borrow" - the Hebrews were the foremost thieves of the entire ancient Near East, as you shall see. 

Forgeries in antiquity were by no means uncommon. [ 181 ] But a forgery is not made from 
documents that do not exist because it is made from previously existing documents in order to qualify as 
a forgery. With each new archeological discovery, as the screaming rabbis with enraged spittle frothing 
around their beards were shouting, "Fake!", they actually seemed to have been more worried about some 
archeological find that would prove that their own "scriptures" were the actual forgery. Hammurabi's 
Laws were written in stone and dug out of 30 meters of solid dirt that had been in place for a thousand 
years before the Jewish "scriptures" were written. Laws written in stone are unchanging and survive 
throughout Eternity. But the laws of Moses were written on deteriorating goat skins and survive by the 
designs of the scribes who edited the copies, and by the scribes who copied the copies, and by the scribes 
who "interpreted" and re-copied the copies. 

One of the greatest points of interest in the Laws of Hammurabi is that they show that the 
mild Sumerian laws had been superseded by the more barbaric Semitic principle of lex talionis, or the 
principle of "an eye for an eye". This more barbaric principle, found in the laws of Hammurabi and the 
laws of Assyria and among the Hebrews, reflects the unmodified practice of the more cruel Semites. [ 182 ] 
Why these rather fair and benign laws of the Sumerians were replaced by the cruel and more repressive 
laws of the Semites, will become clearer as we compare them with each other. 

It is unnecessary and overly tedious to compare each of the various laws of Mesopotamia item 
by item. We only need to inspect the ones that show most clearly the the awilum [the Haves] using these 
Laws to protect and to enrich themselves. It is from this juncture in our history that most of our modern 
day catastrophes and tribulations arise. So, let's take a look at the changes between the Sumerian and the 
Babylonian law codes as the treasonous moneylenders gained wealth and power. 

One of the greatest problems for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] was that they had 
become not just the wealthiest citizens in all of the ancient Near East but also the most hated. During the 
early days of civilization when the moneylenders could take full advantage of the illiterate people through 
eternal debt slavery; when the moneylenders could work their tenant farmers forever, seize the sons 
and daughters and wives and farms and houses of the poor men whom they had defrauded; when the 
merchants could put these enslaved children and wives into prostitution or hard labor; when too much 
of this had happened, eventually the boiling point of resentment and hatred would boil over. The men 
who had lost their loved ones; the men who had lost their life's work of sweating under a scorching sun 
to build a sustaining farm laboriously dug from the desert soil with bronze tools and stubborn oxen; the 
men who had seen their darling daughters torn from their hands by hired goons and turned into slutty 
whores in the moneylenders' brothels and beer taverns, these men took their revenge. 

From the earliest days of the Sumerian moneylenders, there were times when the moneylender's 
impoverished victims would waylay them in their orchards and beat them; or accost them in the dark 
of night and beat them; or attack and beat them at their homes or while they were inspecting the 


repossessed fields of ripe grain; or approach them in the marketplace and spit in their faces and cuff their 
ears. During Sumerian times, the kings and the People were all of the same Sumerian stock and they had 
the same human feelings and empathies for one another. So, the Sumerian punishments for assault and 
battery were mild and fair, requiring only a payment in silver. The moneylenders could not be overly 
rapacious if they valued keeping all of their teeth and not having their bones broken by angry victims of 
the Sumerian Swindle. 

But as the moneylenders gained wealth and political power and as they began to disenfranchise 
and replace the Sumerian people with foreigners, this social empathy began to be stripped from the 
laws. Below, are some of the changes that took place between Sumerian times and the more harshly 
administered times of Semitic rule. 

In the Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC), the principle class of persons considered 
was the free person, the awilum [the Haves]. [ 183 ] This would include all members of society who were 
not slaves or indebted to the moneylenders. There was no preference in those laws given to the super-rich 
over the rich or to the rich over the poor since under Sumerian Law all were considered equally free as 
long as they didn't owe any silver to anybody. 

Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC): 

■ "If a man cuts off the foot of another man, he shall weigh and deliver 10 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man shatters the bone of another man with a club, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of 

■ "If a man cuts off the nose of another man, he shall weigh and deliver 40 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man knocks out another man's tooth, he shall weigh and deliver 2 shekels of silver." 

These laws stipulate a payment in silver. Now look at the Laws of Eshnunna written more than a 
hundred years later. Although Eshnunna was an Amorite kingdom, the majority of the population was 
Sumerian and Sumerianized Amorites. So, these were very fair laws that reflected the Sumerian cultural 
mind set. The principle class with which the laws of Eshnunna are concerned is once again the awilum 
[the Haves]. But the laws also mention the muskenum [Have-Nots] and the wardum [slaves]. Note how 
the harshness and penalties of the laws have increased under Semitic rule. 

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC). [ 184 ] 

■ "If a man bites the nose of another man and severs it, he shall pay 60 shekels of silver. For an eye 
he shall pay 60 shekels of silver; for a tooth 30 shekels; for an ear 30 shekels; for a slap in the face 
10 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man severs another man's finger, he shall pay 20 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man throws another man to the floor in an altercation and breaks his hand, he shall pay 30 
shekels of silver." 

■ "If he breaks his foot, he shall pay 30 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man strikes another man and thus breaks his collarbone, he shall weigh and deliver 20 
shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man hits another man accidentally, he shall pay 10 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a man in the course of a brawl should cause the death of another member of the awilum 
class, he shall weigh and deliver 40 shekels of silver." 

As you can see, the penalties have increased as have the variety of offenses. The few laws 
that covered assault and battery under Sumerian rule were not enough to cover the larger variety of 
methods that the People used to evade the existing Laws or Ur-Nammu and to vent their rage upon the 


moneylenders in new ways. So, more laws covering the increased variety of assaults - along with an 
increase in the amount of fines - was thought to be sufficient under existing popular sentiments. In the 
kingdom of Eshnunna, the moneylenders could still be beaten and their bones broken but it would cost a 
lot more in fines. 

In the small villages and cities of Mesopotamia, once an assault was accomplished and the fine 
paid, that was the end of the matter. If a swindled citizen could beat a moneylender at night, or flood 
his fields or chop down the trees of his orchard without being identified, all was well and good. Even if 
he was named and brought before the judges, the worst that could happen to him would be a steep fine. 
However, paying sixty shekels of silver for the privilege of biting off a moneylender's nose, might have 
seemed to some of the swindled victims to be a pleasure well worth the expense. And if an outraged 
citizen could pool the resources of his kith and kin, maybe the full treatment was not out of their 
price range: slapping the face followed by knocking out a couple of teeth, biting off a fat tamkarum 's 
[merchant-moneylenders] nose, chopping off a finger, poking out an eye, cutting off an ear, breaking his 
hand, breaking one foot and his collarbone, might cost somewhere in the range of 320 shekels of silver, 
a huge fortune in those days but perhaps in a night attack with a good chance of escaping, not out of the 

With such monetary fines, even the poorest farmer might be able to afford to at least break the 
moneylender's legs. A man who had lost his wife and children to debt-slavery or who had been swindled 
out of his life's work of building a farm, might find that turning a moneylender into a toothless cripple 
might be worth whatever the fine was in silver. This is how it had been for the past two thousand years of 
Sumerian rule where men were servants of the gods and the king was the pious, god-appointed shepherd 
of his people. Men had learned to get along on uneasy terms, punctuated by occasional fist-fights, all 
modified by judicial fines in silver. 

But all of this changed as the Semitic moneylenders gained control of Mesopotamia under 
Hammurabi's Babylonian Empire. With Semitic Amorites as rulers, the milder laws of the Sumerians 
were tossed aside. Once Hammurabi and his Amorite financial backers had incorporated the kingdom 
of Eshnunna into his empire, the moneylenders took steps to protect both their swindled properties and 
their private persons. 

Like the Laws of Eshnunna, the Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) [ 185 ] also primarily 
addressed the rights of the awilum [the Haves]. So, for the previous two thousand years, the awilum [the 
Haves] never once gave up their control over society. But as you can see, under Hammurabi's kingship, 
these laws not only increased the fines imposed on anyone harming an awilum [Haves] but also increased 
the severity of punishment by introducing the Semitic principle of "an eye for an eye" or lex talionis. With 
this, the sporting aspect of breaking a moneylender's nose, became less of a sport and more of a serious 

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) [ 186 ] 

■ "If an awilum [Haves] should blind the eye of another awilum, they shall blind his eye." 

■ "If he should break the bone of another awilum [Haves], they shall break his bone." 

■ "If he should blind the eye of a muskenum [a Have-Not] or break the bone of a muskenum, he 
shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver." 

■ "If he should blind the eye of an awilum's [Haves] slave or break the bone of an awilum's slave, 
he shall weigh and deliver one-half of his value in silver." 

■ "If an awilum [Haves] should knock out the tooth of another awilum of his own rank, they shall 
knock out his tooth." 

■ "If he should knock out the tooth of a muskenum [Have-Not], he shall weigh and deliver 20 


shekels of silver." 

■ "If an awilum [Haves] should strike the cheek of an awilum who is of status higher than his own, 
he shall be flogged in the public assembly with 60 stripes of an ox whip." 

■ "If a member of the awilum [Haves] class should strike the cheek of another member of the 
awilum class who is his equal, he shall weigh and deliver 60 shekels of silver." 

■ "If a muskenum [Have-Not] should strike the cheek of another muskenum , he shall weigh and 
deliver 10 shekels of silver." 

■ "If an awilum 's [Haves] slave should strike the cheek of a member of the awilum class, they shall 
cut off his ear." 

■ "If an awilum [Haves] should strike another awilum during a brawl and inflict upon him a 
wound, that awilum shall swear, 'I did not strike intentionally' and he shall satisfy the physician 
by paying his fee." 

■ "If he should die from his beating, he shall also swear 'I did not strike him intentionally' if 
he, the victim is a member of the awilum [Haves] class, he shall weigh and deliver 30 shekels of 

■ "If he, the victim, is a member of the muskenum [Have-Nots] class, he shall weigh and deliver 
20 shekels of silver." 

In the first place, notice how the roles are reversed and a greater inequality in the laws has arisen. 
Not only are the laws more harsh but (as is usual with laws that are written by the rich) these laws are 
actually harsher for the poor than for the rich. Breaking a bone, knocking out the teeth or poking out an 
eye of a fellow member of the wealthy awilum class results in their own bones being broken in following 
this Semitic principle of "an eye for an eye". 

The Laws also gave the very rich protection against the moderately rich since the ruthless 
swindles of the moneylenders were not necessarily restricted to swindling the poor because they preyed 
upon whomever they could, including the wealthy among them. 

These same laws allowed a rich awilum [Haves] to break the bones or poke out the eyes of a poor 
muskenum [Have-Nots] while only being required to pay a fine in silver which would not be a burden for 
a rich man. 

The laws were also made to prevent a rich awilum [Have] from ordering his slave to assault 
another awilum . The reason for this law is found in the penalty. By having the ear cut off that listened to 
the illegal order from his master, the slaves knew that they were prohibited by the king from committing 
such crimes even if ordered to do so by their master. 

While the laws decree the penalty for the rich assaulting the rich and the rich assaulting the poor, 
what these laws do not state is the penalty of a poor muskenum [Have-Not] for committing mayhem on 
the rich. No, their eyes were not poked out or their bones broken since that was the penalty for the rich 
committing such crimes against other rich people. For a poor muskenum [Have-Nots] to assault the rich 
awilum, the penalty was death. 

And so, you can see the great change that took place in Mesopotamian Culture once the 
moneylenders came into power behind the throne of the kings. Protecting their precious and pampered 
persons from the retribution of their victims and debt-slaves, was only one power that the moneylenders 
seized for themselves during the Babylonian Empire of King Hammurabi. The thing next most precious 
to their personal safety was their wealth and property. For example, compare the laws related to theft of 

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) covering THEFT: 


At the time of Ur-Nammu, the one thousand year-old common laws of Sumeria were still in effect 
governing theft. That is, if someone stole something, they had to replace it double or triple or six times 
over. Both the awilum [Haves] and the muskenum [Have-Nots] were equal under Sumerian Law. Both 
paid the same fine for theft. 

In these early times, the Sumerian People did not stray far from their home cities or villages. 
Everybody knew everybody else. And for someone to steal something would be noticed by the entire 
community. Thieves were, after all, relations and neighbors, so if they took what was not theirs, in a spirit 
of compassionate chastisement they were required to replace what they had stolen plus a fine. But life 
became more perilous for thieves as the acquisitive and greedy moneylenders gained control over society. 

A little more than a hundred years after Ur-Nammu, the Amorites ruling a mixed society of 
Semites and Sumerians began to exert a harsher control over their property. 

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC) for THEFT: 

■ "A man who is caught in the field of a muskenum [Have-Not] in the crop during daytime, shall 
pay 10 shekels of silver. He who is caught in the crop at night, shall die. He shall not get away 

■ "A man who is caught in the house of a muskenum [Have-Not] during daytime, shall pay 10 
shekels of silver. He who is caught in the house at night, shall die, he shall not get away alive." 

■ "If a guard is negligent in guarding a house, and a burglar breaks into the house, they shall kill 
the guard of the house that was broken into and he shall be buried at the breach without a grave." 

■ "If a man gives property of his as a deposit . . . and if the property he gives disappears without 
that the house was burglarized, the doorway broken down or the window forced, the (depositary) 
will replace his (the depositor's) property." 

■ "If a man buys a slave, a slave-girl, an ox or any other valuable good but cannot legally establish 
the seller, he is a thief." 

At a first glance of these laws, it might appear that the Amorite king of Eshnunna was protecting 
the poor from theft. But it must be remembered that the muskenum [Have-Nots] did not own property. 
If they were able to avoid starvation, it was only by working as tenant farmers and debt- slaves of the rich 
awilum [the Haves]. They were landless and powerless and only one step above slavery, so it was not 
a great feat to be able to steal from them. But the laws governing theft were not written to protect the_ 
muskenum [Have-Nots] who worked in the fields, they were written to protect the awilum [the Haves] 
who owned both the fields and the services of the muskenum . These laws enact the death penalty for 
anyone found in the tenant-farmed fields of the rich awilum [the Haves] . Thus, these laws at first glance 
seem to protect both the rich and the poor by metting out the death penalty for theft. However, the laws 
actually protect the property of the rich who hired the poor to work on those properties. In addition, the 
death penalty is decreed for any guards who fail to protect the property of the awilum [the Haves] from 
theft. Furthermore, the clay tablets for proving the ownership of property was a required document. 
Remember, it was a Mesopotamian legal requirement to always have a written deed or contract for all 
business deals and all transfers or sales of property. 

For nearly two hundred years these laws governing a mixed Sumerian and Amorite society were 
supreme. But once the Semitic moneylenders had increased their wealth and power under the protection 
of King Hammurabi, they insisted upon and got the following collection of laws that locked their 
property ownership of land and slaves into the steel grip of government enforced law. 

The Law Code of Hammurabi has been hailed as a great advancement of civilization by the 
lawyers and judges even into our modern times, but as lawyers and judges they are biased. Laws are not 


necessarily good merely because they are laws. Good laws must also be fair and just laws. Laws designed 
to enslave or oppress one class of society for the benefit of another class are not good laws. Therefore, 
the Laws of Hammurabi need to be understood not only in the context of their historical times, but in 
relation to who benefited from his laws . Here is what the laws for theft became under Hammurabi: 

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) for THEFT: 

■ "If a man steals valuables belonging to the god or to the palace, that man shall be killed, and also 
he who received the stolen goods from him shall be killed." 

■ "If a man should purchase silver, gold, a slave, a slave woman, an ox, a sheep, a donkey, or 
anything else whatsoever from a son of a man or from a slave of a man without witnesses or a 
contract - or if he accepts the goods for safekeeping - that man is a thief, he shall be killed." 

■ "If a man steals an ox, a sheep, a donkey, a pig, or a boat - if it belongs either to the god or to the 
palace, he shall give thirty- fold; if it belongs to a commoner, he shall replace it tenfold; if the thief 
does not have anything to give, he shall be killed." 

■ "If a man breaks into a house, they shall kill him and hang him in front of that very breach." 

■ "If a man commits a robbery and is then seized, that man shall be killed." 

It should be noticed that as harsh as these laws are, they were tilted in favor of the awilum [the 
Haves]. The palace and the temple were protected by the death penalty for theft. The pawn-broker was 
protected by a cuneiform contract against fencing stolen property. The awilum [the Haves] could steal 
property and, if caught, only pay a fine. But the muskenum [the Have-Nots] who were too poor to pay a 
fine, were executed for theft, for breaking and entering and executed for strong-armed robbery. 

And so, as the power of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] increased, their control over the 
farms and goods that they had swindled also increased. To give themselves the greatest authority and to 
keep for themselves the greatest wealth meant that a corresponding reduction in the freedom and wealth 
of everybody else, was their strategy. In a society of unequals, those who have the greatest advantages 
tend to secure their wealth and power through domination and tyranny over those who have the least 
advantages. Backing the merchant-moneylenders in their greed were the judges [ awilum , the Haves] who 
allegedly were servants of the king but in fact were also in the position of being the servants of whoever 
could afford to give them gifts. 

The vast empire of a king cannot be managed by the king alone. He needs helpers, aids, ministers, 
clerks, scribes, professional bureaucrats, soldiers to enforce order and, above all, judges to administer the 
laws and control the citizens through declarations of guilt or innocence and the imposing of penalties 
and punishments to transgressors of the law. Judges were appointed by the king and they required no 
special training or knowledge other than the necessary trust to become appointed by the king. Officially, 
the paid officials known as "judges" had been in existence in the ancient Near East since before the times 
ofSargon(~2370BC).[ 187 ] 

From Sumerian times, the moneylenders knew the advantage to themselves to have judges as 
their friends. It became of extreme importance to them that installed judges would pass judgments 
favorable to themselves because there were no juries to stand between the defendant and the law. A 
judge became, by default, a sort of miniature king whose final judgment carried all of the weight of the 
king, himself. The judges, alone, determined the guilt or innocence of a defendant. The judges alone 
interpreted the laws and could only be overruled by the king, himself. So, they were a power unto 
themselves, little sub-kings ruling over the people through the law. The Reader should remember this 
powerful and official substratum of society because we will be inspecting the judges more carefully in 
Volume II; The Monsters of Babylon. 


You have seen how the laws governing the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] changed 
between the Sumerian and the Semitic dynasties. These were laws protecting the rich. What about the 
laws governing the very poorest victims of the Sumerian Swindle, that is, the laws governing the slaves? 

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) governing SLAVES: 

■ "If a slave woman curses someone acting with the authority of her mistress, they shall scour her 
mouth with one sila [ 1 liter] of salt." 

■ "If a slave woman strikes someone acting with the authority of her mistress. ..." 

■ "If a slave ventures beyond the borders of his or her city and a man returns him or her, the 
slave's master shall weight and deliver x shekels of silver to the man who returned the slave." 

Not many laws concerning slaves were necessary in those Sumerian times. Those that have 
survived show a protection of the slave from having to follow the orders of a master to do some act of 
assault or battery. Such laws concerning a slave "cursing" a free person were taken very seriously among 
god-fearing people who believed in the power of both gods and demons. "Cursing" was not just swearing, 
it was the casting of evil spells. Slaves were not likely to run away when the citizens were always eager to 
collect a payment in silver for returning them. And where would they run? To starve in the desert or to 
be killed by bandits in the mountains, was not a better alternative. 

Laws of Eshnunna: (2000-1750 BC) regarding SLAVES: 

■ "The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] and the sabitum [ale wife -moneylender] shall not 
receive silver, barley, wool or sesame oil from a slave or a slave-girl as an investment." 

■ "If a man is caught with a stolen slave or a stolen slave-girl, he shall surrender slave by slave and 
slave-girl by slave-girl." 

■ "If he has no claim against him, but nevertheless restrains the wife of a muskenum [Have-Not] 
or the child of a muskenum and causes their death, it is a capital offence. The restrainer who 
restrains shall die." 

With these laws, slaves were prevented from stealing from their masters or from buying their 
freedom through wise investments. But now the penalty for holding a stolen or runaway slave was to 
return the slave and to give an additional slave as penalty. Even at this late date, you can see the mild 
Sumerian character at play within these laws. The 

awilum [the Haves] were prevented from falsely seizing the wives and children of the poor muskenum 
[Have-Nots] . But once again, life became harsher when the Semitic laws of Hammurabi ruled the land. 

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning SLAVES: 

■ "If a man should harbor a fugitive slave or slave woman of either the palace or of a commoner 
in his house and not bring him out at the herald's public proclamation, that householder shall be 

■ "If an obligation is outstanding against a man and he sells or gives into debt service his wife, 
his son, or his daughter, they shall perform service in the house of their buyer or of the one who 
holds them in debt service for three years, their release shall be secured in the fourth year." 

■ "If he should give a male or female slave into debt service, the merchant may extend the term 
beyond the three years, he may sell him, there are no grounds for a claim." 


■ "If a barber shaves off the slave hair lock of a slave not belonging to him without the consent of 
the slave's owner, they shall cut off that barber's hand." 

■ "If a man misinforms a barber so that he then shaves off the slave hair lock of a slave not 
belonging to him, they shall kill that man and hang him in his own doorway; the barber shall 
swear, 'I did not knowingly shave it off', and he shall be released." 

Again, property ownership as well as the death penalty for anyone taking that property, is 
strongly enforced in the Laws of Hammurabi. These were laws that were written for the protection of the 
properties of the rich merchants and moneylenders. 

There is one other set of laws that will have a strong influence on other sections of this history. 
And that is the laws governing the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] which again demonstrate the very 
profitable monopoly of the beer sellers and tavern-keepers at all stages of Mesopotamian civilization. 

Sumerian Laws of Ur-Nammu (2112-2095 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. 
This is from the Sumerian Law of X which is probably the end portion of the Laws of Ur-Nammu. 

■ "If a woman innkeeper gives one of her vats of beer on credit to a man, she shall receive 50 silas 
[about 50 liters] of grain at the harvest." 

If the man earned the official standard wage often liters of grain per day and not less, this 
amounted to more than five days wages. Thus, the power of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] to 
cheat the drunks by charging even greater amounts for loans of beer, was curtailed. She could still take 
advantage of the drunks, but her ability to swindle the workers out of their wages was limited to an 
established amount. Again, this law legitimatised a high rate of interest on a drunk's bar tab. 

However, by Hammurabi's time, the wages were much less than the old Sumerian standard of 
ten liters of grain per day. As previously mentioned, wages fell to as low as two liters of bread and two 
liters of beer per day. It became a favorite trick of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to pay their 
workers with alcohol because it was cheaper than food and it made the starving people feel less miserable 
by numbing the pain of their wretched existence. Two liters of beer could induce a drunken stupor at the 
end of the day but not incapacitate the worker for the next day of labor. 

As in modern times, a drunken alcoholic might find that at harvest time, he had drunk up all of 
his wages and perhaps even pawned his personal possessions and fallen further into debt to the point of 
being enslaved by the sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. But by law, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] 
was limited to a set amount of interest-on-the-loan for each vat of beer that was put "on the tab." And that 
interest-on-the-loan was not small. 

Fifty liters of grain can brew about sixty gallons or about two modern beer barrels. A vat of 
Sumerian beer had a capacity of 30 silas (liters) or about eight gallons. Thus, when the grain was 
brewed into more beer, the interest-on-the-loan was about 750%. These huge profit margins that can 
be made with a monopoly on alcohol has been a major income source for the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] throughout history, as you shall see in Volume Three, The Bloodsuckers of Judah. 

With only a few drunks in her debt, a clever sabitum [alewife-moneylender] could profit nicely 
since she could get the grain for brewing for free by charging interest on the bar bills of the Sumerian 
drunks. Go to any modern day tavern and the chances are very good of finding flush-faced, red-nosed 
and penniless workers who empty the garbage and sweep the floors in exchange for drinks simply 
because this is "how it has always been." 

Laws of Eshnunna (2000-1750 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender]. 


■ "If an ubarum [foreigner] a naptarum or a mudum [workers paid with rations of beer], want to 
sell his beer, the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] shall sell the beer for him at the current price." 

Once again, the monopoly over booze was limited to the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] alone. 
No one else in Mesopotamian society was allowed to sell beer or wine even when beer was their payment 
for goods or for labor or for their ordinary rations. This monopoly over alcohol reaped greater profits to 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] than did free trade in booze. By controlling the entire market, 
they could control the price. Only the king could limit that price. 

Once again, this "limitation in prices" is not all that it appears to be at first glance. Secret 
Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "Kings are required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud 
is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed." Thus, a king can appear to limit the ravages of the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] when, in fact, he is actually legitimatizing their thefts. Under the 
power and authority of a king, the moneylenders can defraud the People because the king's decree makes 
their swindles "legal". 

The same tricks are played in modern times where the bankers and financiers impoverish entire 
nations and steal the homes from millions of people, all while hiding behind laws that makes their grand 
larceny "legal". And when the People scream their outrage, the bribed politicians pass more laws "to 
protect the consumers" and "to insure bank reform". But these are actually fake laws that guarantee that 
the moneylenders make a profit under slightly different rules. The modern laws may be different but the 
same Sumerian Swindle "has always been here." 

The economic power of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender], should be remembered since her 
occupation will be a powerful arm of the moneylenders throughout history. The tavern keeper was an 
important source of profits and a vital information source to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. 
So, they protected their monopoly. And when the worker brought his beer to the sabitum to sell for him, 
his wages could be reduced through her charging him a commission to sell his beer or offering to buy it 
at a reduced price. Thus, through unjust laws, the moneylenders and merchants could "legally" defraud 
the people by hiding behind the permission of the king. 

Under the Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning the sabitum [alewife-moneylender], 
the penalties became harsher: 

■ "If a woman innkeeper [sabitum] should refuse to accept grain for the price of beer but accepts 
only silver measured by the large weight, thereby reducing the value of beer in relation to the 
value of grain, they shall charge and convict that woman innkeeper and they shall cast her into 
the water." 

■ "If there should be a woman innkeeper [sabitum] in whose house criminals congregate , and she 
does not seize those criminals and lead them off to the palace authorities, that woman innkeeper 
shall be killed." 

■ "If a woman innkeeper [sabitum] gives one vat of beer as a loan, she shall take 50 silas of grain at 
the harvest." 

Hammurabi made sure that the People could at least get drunk by trading their farm produce 
for beer if they had no silver. Remember, alcohol production and sales was a monopoly of the alewife- 
moneylender. So, if she only accepted silver from farmers who had no sliver but who had grain, then 
they had no where else to buy beer. Hammurabi's Laws also prevented the merchant-moneylenders from 
sucking the silver out of society and subverting the commodity-barter mechanism. Thus, the harshness 
of the law. Price controls also maintained the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] cartel's monopoly over 


grain and beer prices by keeping them uniform and non-competitive. 

And because of the relationship between drunkenness and crime, Hammurabi made the sabitum 
[alewife -moneylender] into an unofficial "sheriff" to police her own premises for thieves. Notice that it 
was the alewife who was expected to "seize those criminals" rather than merely calling for the assistance 
of soldiers or "police". This implies the ability of the alewife to do so through her own bouncers and 
strong-arm men. Just as in modern times, drunken brawls in the taverns of the ancient Near East were 
a common occurrence. Why else would there be fines for biting off someone's nose? The bouncers and 
enforcers at the beckon-and-call of the sabitum [alewife-moneylender] are another indication of the 
power of this class of women in Mesopotamian society. The sabitum [alewife-moneylender] maintained 
her power even while women, in general, were being reduced to servitude and prostitution by the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . 

Although the merchants and moneylenders had acquired much wealth and political power, 
they were not immune to justice. Some of their ancient and lucrative tricks for stealing the wealth of 
the People were restricted by Hammurabi's Laws. This did not make Hammurabi popular with many of 
the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . The tamkarum had backed his rise to power in their efforts 
to create a larger government to rule all of Sumeria and Akkad. A larger government could grant larger 
monopolies over commerce and centralize control over more wealth. But some of his laws so much 
restricted their profiteering that the merchants and moneylenders began looking for ways to have 
him overthrown. Secret Fraud #17 of the Sumerian Swindle reads, "Kings are required to legitimatize 
a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed." They could influence 
Hammurabi but not corrupt him. Hammurabi became too powerful for the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] to destroy in his lifetime, so they bided their time in order to attack his children. 

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning DISHONEST MERCHANTS 

■ "If a merchant should take interest and then does not deduct the payments of either grain or 
silver as much as he received or does not write a new tablet, or adds the interest payments to the 
capital sum, that merchant shall return two-fold as much grain as he received." 

■ "If a man borrows grain or silver from a merchant and does not have grain or silver with which 
to repay but does have other goods, he shall give to his merchant in the presence of witnesses 
whatever he has at hand, in amounts according to the exchange value; the merchant will not 
object; he shall accept it." 

■ "If a man stores grain in another man's house, he shall give 5 silas of grain per 300 silas of grain 
as annual rent of the granary." 

As harsh as Hammurabi's Laws were, they also put limits upon the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders]. In all societies, dishonest merchants create a lot of civil unrest, violent retribution and 
economic hardships among the People. Yes, the Babylonian laws were weighted in favor of the "Haves". 
But as a true king and shepherd of his people, Hammurabi decreed that the dishonest methods of the 
merchants would not be tolerated. Hammurabi gave great advantages to the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] to satisfy their limitless greed. But he also put a stop to their outright thefts. 

Hammurabi standardized prices expressed in silver on a large number of commodities in an effort 
to limit any price gouging by the merchant-moneylenders. But these were not so much price controls 
as they were official exchange rates for commodities versus silver. This allowed for the barter of goods 
among the people without an exchange of silver. And this limited the profits of the tamkarum [merchant- 

These were, after all, barter societies. Although silver functioned in many ways like money, it was 


not true money. It was a commodity money that could be traded like any other commodity He did not 
allow the limited amount of silver, which could be manipulated in availability by the moneylenders, to 
become monopolized to the exclusion of all other commodities. So, he set official exchange rates with 
silver as a standard of exchange but not as the only means of exchange. 

The understanding of what true money is, would have to wait a thousand more years until the 
rise of the Greek philosophers. But for now, silver was just a commodity barter item. It was convenient to 
equate all goods and services to shekel weights of silver. But when silver was lacking, Hammurabi decreed 
that other barter goods of equal value were acceptable as payment of loans and for equitable trade. 

Thus, in the above laws, he declared Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle to be illegal: "Loans 
of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the capital." Merchants were no longer allowed to 
practice the swindle of withdrawing silver from circulation and then not accepting grain in equal value as 
payment for loans. This prevented moneylenders from stealing farms by manipulating silver supplies. 

The above laws also prevented the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] from lying to the 
illiterate people about how much they owed. It had been a part of the common law of all of Mesopotamia 
since writing had been invented that a written contract was required for every business transaction. But 
what the wily tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had done was to write out an initial contract to lock 
the borrower into making payments and then not writing down the payments made or reducing the 
amount owed by the payments made. This chained the illiterate people to perpetual debt-slavery since 
there was no record of their payments but only a record of the original loan. 

Hammurabi put a stop to compound interest in the above laws concerning dishonest merchants. 
And he required that all tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] give written receipts for all transactions 
and a new tablet record of the balance of all accounts. 

Also, the poorest farmers were protected from high storage fees under Hammurabi's Laws. No 
longer could the rich farmer or the grain merchant charge outrageous grain storage fees and thus steal 
the poor man's livelihood. They were restricted to 1.6% of the grain for granary rental space. 

As Secret Fraud #17 was practiced by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to legalize what 
was actually their own criminal conduct, it was also their guide for removing honest kings. "Kings are 
required to legitimatize a swindle but once the fraud is legalized, those very kings must be sacrificed." 

Hammurabi had been very useful to the moneylenders in protecting their personal safety and 
their swindled property but he had also limited some of their most profitable scams of the Sumerian 
Swindle. So, they schemed to have him removed. Hammurabi was too powerful a king and too 
independent in his power. With Secret Fraud #17, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had built 
him up but once he had served their purposes and had proven to be not entirely under their control, 
they schemed to pull him down. But Hammurabi, the mighty king, was too powerful. So, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] would have to wait until they could pull down his sons. 

There are a couple of other areas that is of interest in this history of the blood-sucking 
moneylenders. These laws give us insight into the Semitic mindset of Hammurabi and his Amorite 

■ "If a child should strike his father, they shall cut off his hand." 

In this, the patriarchal nature of Amorite society is shown whereby the authority of the father 
over his children is unquestioned. This mindset should be remembered since it is a element in later 
chapters of this history. 

Laws of Hammurabi (1792-1750 BC) concerning MURDER: 


■ "If a man accuses another man and charges him with homicide, but cannot bring proof against 
him, his accuser shall be killed." 

This is an important law for more reasons than are at first obvious. Out of the 275 to 300 laws of 
Hammurabi, this is the number one and very first law written on his stele . So, its importance should be 
more carefully considered than has been the case in previous histories. 

From Sumerian times, it was an accepted fact of civilization that a murderer had given up his 
right to life when he took the life of someone else. The Sumerian Laws stipulate the death penalty for 
murderers. But under the rule of the Amorites, the very first and number one of Hammurabi's Laws was 
not decreeing a death penalty for murder, it was decreeing a death penalty for accusing someone else of 
murder without proof. What do we have here? Why is this deemed to be of number one importance? 

Upon the establishment of the Babylonian Empire, after nearly two thousand years of greed, 
theft, grand larceny, kidnapping, pimping, enslavement, rape, sexual perversion, debauchery and 
swindling, as being among their many methods of operation, the moneylenders also practiced murder. 
The moneylenders had reached such a level of power in society that they could slyly commit murder 
in order to eliminate business rivals and terrorize muskenum [Have-Nots]. Or to increase their land 
ownership, they could kill farmers who refused to sell and then buy the farm from the grief- stricken and 
impoverished widow. As long as they didn't get caught red-handed, they could kill with impunity. 

In agrarian societies where everybody knows everybody else, acts of murder or vengeance do not 
necessarily require many proofs as to who committed the crime, what his motives were, or who would 
profit from a murder. A farmer who refused to sell his prime farm and was found murdered the next day, 
required very little guessing as to who did the deed. So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were 
often under suspicion. Accusations that they had killed or had hired killers, made their lives socially 
besmirched and liable to the River Ordeal. As hated as they were, even with all of their wealth, a murder 
accusation could make them pariahs throughout society. 

These accusations must have been numerous and common if the very first of Hammurabi's Laws 
decreed the death penalty to anyone who accused another of murder without proof And what proof 
could there be in an age where finger-prints and forensic evidence were unknown? With only flickering 
fire light and dim lamp wicks to illuminate dark nights, there were plenty of deep and shifting shadows 
for murderers to hide in and escape. Even with known motive and much opportunity but without 
witnesses, murder was a simple thing for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] or for their henchmen 
crouching in the shadows. 

The moneylenders' methods were stealth and secrecy and callousness. The Sumerian Swindle 
required all three. They profited from starvation, suffering and warfare. They tore children away from 
parents, destroyed families, enslaved and seduced youths and debauched the People with drunkenness, 
gambling, prostitution and poverty. So, it was a small step to add murder to their many crimes. But 
under the protection of the king, as long as they left no witnesses and no clues, these specially-protected 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were sheltered even from accusations of murder. Among the 
numerous complications of a civilized society, the accusations must have been numerous if Hammurabi 
made this his first law. The moneylenders could still murder anyone who got in their way, but small- 
town gossip and accusation could no longer be used to besmirch their high and mighty prestige because 
now their victims would have to have solid proof that these tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had 
killed anyone. Without such proof, the moneylenders could have the lone witness and accuser silenced 
and executed by the king, himself. This very first of Hammurabi's Laws protected the richest and most 
ruthless of the awilum [Haves] from the accusations of the muskenum [Have-Nots]. 

The tight grip of the awilum [the Haves] upon Babylonian society is further exemplified by 
the swindle that was used to keep the soldiers tied to the land. As previously stated, the Babylonian 


conscription system, the ilkum [military land grant], was a cheap way for the king to get soldiers and 
to keep them in service by tying them to their property which they could not sell and which they were 
required to farm. Starvation was the root of the swindle that the moneylenders, through their monopoly 
over silver and commerce, were able to gradually reduce the pay of the workers. During the Third 
Dynasty of Ur onward, the daily wage of a worker was 10 liters (about 2.5 gallons) of barley per day. This 
standard appeared in the cuneiform school tablets and continued to be a valid ideal for two thousand 
years. However, during the Babylonian Dynasty, the actual hiring contracts showed that most people 
earned far less than ten liters per day. According to the Laws of Hammurabi: 

■ "If a man hires a hireling, he shall give 6 barleycorns of silver per day from the beginning of the 
year until the end of the fifth month and 5 barley corns of silver per day from the sixth month 
until the end of the year." [ 188 ] 

This wage control calculates out as a total of 4 shekels of silver per year. Except for holidays, the 
laborer worked seven days a week for the whole day from sun up to sun down. In those days, four shekels 
of silver all at one time would buy four gur (1200 liters) of barley. But the silver was not paid all at one 
time, it was dribbled out in 5 or 6 barleycorn (5 or 6 grains) quantities. 

Thus, the 1200 liters of grain yearly wage of a laborer during the Babylonian Empire calculates 
out to a daily wage of only 3.3 liters of barley per day. This amount would feed a man and a small family 
on a minimum level and would allow him to put aside a subsistence amount for the winter months. But 
unlike the wages paid during the Sumerian times, it was not enough for him to save and buy his own land 
even if he was fully employed. And a hireling would not ordinarily be guaranteed a daily job even at this 
minimum wage. 

This is where the full swindle of the very poorest people worked its worst. With the only jobs 
available paying barely enough to support a family, with even the lowest paid jobs being given to foreign 
workers for their cheaper labor, then the only alternative for the poor man was to join the army. With an 
ilkum [military land grant] , he could own land in exchange for risking his life in war. In this way, the rise 
of Babylonia marked the ascendance of the merchants' and the moneylenders' greatest profit source and 
their most ingenious swindle, the waging of war. 

With control of Babylonian society firmly in the grasp of the voracious moneylenders, the well- 
fed and happy days of the god-conscious Sumerian civilization were a forgotten memory. Ruthlessness 
and greed began to dominate society. The days when the People all worked to serve the gods came to an 
end as the petty ambition of kings and the greed of the merchants and moneylenders became the major 
forces behind the flow of history. Babylonia is where all wars-as-a-business-strategy and most of today's 
sufferings of Mankind began, the days when the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] gained control of 
over society and over kings. 

Hammurabi's political unification of the country together with his social and economic changes 
associated with that period, mark an important turning point in Mesopotamian history. In Babylonia, the 
balance of power now lay firmly in the north. Although Babylonia would be ruled by a variety of kings, 
henceforth no other city was seriously to rival Babylon in prestige. Babylon's fame still is great today, 
nearly four thousand years later. 

Hammurabi, the great king and servant of the gods, was too powerful for the schemes of the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] to succeed during his lifetime. After Hammurabi died, his son, 
Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC), was initially successful in emulating his father's policies. But soon the 
south was in revolt. The remaining Sumerians (the Southerners) had grown weary of Amorite greed and 
ruthlessness. In 1738 BC the south fell to Iliman (Iluma-ilum), founder of the Sealand dynasty, who ruled 
the Babylonian lands as far north as Nippur. The Sealanders had begun to move into the area shortly after 


Hammurabi's death. [ 189 ] 

The Sealanders were lured into the southern region by good farming land that was being sold 
by the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. But the Sealanders were not fools. They could 
clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian 
farmers. So, their natural suspicions prompted them to ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you 
not betraying your own people by doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 
because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Sealanders had no reason to hate the Babylonian 
moneylenders, yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and 
generosity to the new immigrants, those Sealanders who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum 
let them buy on time at low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the Babylonian moneylenders 
jumped from their old victims who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the 
moneylenders as their friends and guides and mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words 
and low interest rates, coiled around its prey. It's bite would come later. 

This new Sealand Dynasty, under the influence of the Sumerian priests, appears to have taken on 
the mantle of the earlier rulers of Isin as an attempt was made to bring back civilization "as it had always 
been" where the People served the gods and the kings protected the People. 

This Sealand Dynasty provided refuge for the Sumerian priests who moved away from the 
Amorites of Babylon and set up their Sumerian centers of culture and learning in the south, once again 
at the ancient Sumerian holy city of Nippur. Not only did the Sealanders encroach on the immediate 
territory of Babylon in the years after Hammurabi's death, but in the early 16th century BC they appear to 
have succeeded, at least briefly, to the Babylonian throne. This we infer from the King List which includes 
the Sealand Dynasty "of Urukug", a city otherwise unknown. [ 19 °] 

But the Sealanders were not Babylon's only enemies. Samsu-iluna's 9th year-name mentions 
the Kassite army. This is the first reference to the Kassites who, some 1 50 years later, would inherit the 
hegemony of Babylon. Where did the Kassites come from? The Kassites were cheap labor imported from 
the mountains to the east to the agricultural region of western Babylonia on the Euphrates. 

The Kassites arrived as cheap labor and as buyers of the foreclosed farms that were being sold 
by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . But the Kassites were not fools. They could clearly see the 
advantages for themselves to occupy the land and the disadvantages to the Babylonian farmers. So, their 
natural suspicions prompted them to ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you not betraying 
your own people by doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 
because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Kassites had no reason to hate the Babylonian moneylenders, 
yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new 


immigrants, those Kassites who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time at 
low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the Babylonian moneylenders jumped from their old victims 
who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and 
guides and mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around 
its prey. It's bite would come later. 

Once again, the moneylenders had betrayed their own people. Once again, their importation 
of foreigners as cheap labor undermined the social and ethnic integrity of the nation. Once again, 
the moneylenders were able to impoverish their own people by lowering wages with foreign labor 
and selling foreclosed farm land to foreigners. And once again, the aliens took over the lands where- 
in they previously had been guest workers. This change in the social fabric was gradual, taking place 
over a century. But repeating the pattern, once the Kassites had reached a large enough portion of the 
population, they took over the country. And their "friends, the tamkarum , helped them do it. 

The period of the 17th to 16th centuries BC was a time of great political change in Western Asia, 
and the Kassites were but one of a number of non-Semitic peoples - the Hurrians and Hittites are others 
whom we shall meet shortly - who began to exert pressure from the north on the weakening kingdom of 
Babylonia. The linguistic affinities of the Kassite language have yet to be established, but some features of 
their religion may suggest contact with Aryan-Indo-European peoples. 

As their numbers increased and as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] sold the foreclosed 
properties and farms to these foreigners, Kassite personal names began to appear with increasing 
frequency on Babylonian business documents. Like all of the other foreigners who had taken over the 
lands into which they had been invited by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], the Kassites began 
their steady influx into the country peacefully as hired workers and land buyers. By the end of the 1700's 
BC, Kassite settlers had obtained holdings even within the city of Babylon itself. Yet, it is clear that 
from the reign of Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC) onwards the Kassites were also a military threat because 
Kassite tradition implied the founding of an independent state at this time somewhere on the borders of 
Babylonia on the middle Euphrates. [ 191 ] 

Once again remember, political power comes from occupation of the land. Not land deeds, not 
national boundaries, not ethnic majority, not claims of ownership, not claims of historical precedence but 
occupation alone gives ownership and power and this occupation is not necessarily achieved by military 
means. Once the foreigners had been settled on the land by the treasonous moneylenders, and once their 
numbers had increased to a near-majority, instead of being the smiling and friendly guest workers and 
hired laborers who were striving to fit into the dominant society, their attitudes changed into the less 
friendly demeanor of land-owners and usurpers. They did not have to pretend to be friendly in order to 
be accepted by the Babylonians. Once these alien laborers and petty land owners had occupied the land, 
they could do as they pleased to control it. 

Samsu-iluna maintained some control to the northwest, but the middle Euphrates was certainly 
lost to Babylonia by the time of his son, Abi-eshuh (171 1-1684 BC), whose reign is notable for little more 
than his failure to catch the Sealand ruler Iliman by "damming the Tigris". 

Although there appears to have been no serious challenge to their authority from the other cities 
of Sumer and Akkad, the last kings of Babylon's First Dynasty clearly presided over a kingdom dwindling 
steadily in both territory and prestige. Literary and economic documents preserved from this period 
continue to reflect an apparently prosperous society in which the arts flourished. [ 192 ] For example, the 
scribe who copied the only known Old Babylonian epic cycle of the Flood Legend known as "Atrahasis", 
worked in Sippar at this time. Even though there were still no Hebrews or Jews anywhere to be found on 
the entire planet, the early Biblical stories as found in the Old Testament — such as the Flood, Noah and 
the Ark, the Laws of Moses (Hammurabi), Sampson (Gilgamesh), the Garden of Eden, Genesis, Adam 
and Eve and Job - were already being published by the Babylonians and certainly not by the lying Jews. 


The national state that Hammurabi established did not long endure after his death. But by 
defeating the major city-states of Babylonia and uniting the country if only briefly under the hegemony 
of Babylon, he achieved a political result which was to affect the history of Mesopotamia for the next two 
millennia. No longer was there a Sumeria, but the entire region from the Southern Sea (Persian Gulf) to 
the borders of Assyria became known as Babylonia. Babylon became the established seat of kingship, a 
position she was to maintain unchallenged until the Greeks built Seleucia 1500 years later. As a religious 
center for the many gods, Babylon survived until the 1st century AD, while the mystique surrounding its 
name remains with us today. Much of Babylon's religious hold over the country involved the Semitic cult 
of Marduk, who came to replace the Sumerian god Enlil of Nippur as the bestower of legitimate kingship. 
But this religious transformation did not take place until long after the reign of Hammurabi. 

Hammurabi's son and successor, Samsu-iluna (1749-1712 BC), tried to follow his father's policies. 
But the moneylenders were not pleased with the Law Code of Hammurabi and sought to establish 
more of a "free market" where they could practice the Sumerian Swindle unrestricted. Within ten 
years, Samsu-iluna gave up most of the new empire. In 1738 BC the south fell to Iliman, founder of the 
Sealand dynasty, who ruled Babylonia as far north as Nippur. The so-called "Dynasty of the Sealands" 
continued to control a region approximately the size of ancient Sumeria for more than two hundred 
more years, outliving, indeed, Hammurabi's First Dynasty of Babylon. The political history of Samsu- 
iluna's successors, Abi-Eshuh (1711-1684 BC), Ammi-ditana (1683-1647 BC), and Ammi-saduqa (1646- 
1626 BC), was largely a matter of small scale border campaigns and work on defensive walls, perhaps 
indicating an awareness of the possibility of attack. [ 193 ] 

Amid the troubles and turmoil, the ever-scheming merchant-moneylenders were surreptitiously 
undermining Babylonian society with their criminality. For example, a hundred years after Hammurabi, 
two decrees in the edict of Ammi-saduqa of Babylon (1646-1626 BC) concern offenses punishable by 
death. These also, incidentally, show the continuing problems society was having with the never ending 
greed and dishonesty of the merchant-moneylenders versus the powerlessness of the peasants: 

■Edict #18, "The wholesale and retail merchants who have used a false seal (in order to certify 
their documents), will be put to death." 

This indicates that forgery of cylinder seals and stamps had been a problem along with tax- 
evasion and smuggling. No matter the great personal advantages that the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had in commerce, they were always looking for ways to increase their profits and their 
advantages. By their own perverted standards, they were clever businessmen; but by any standards they 
were the vilest of criminals doing business. And yet, they were counted in Mesopotamian society as being 
among the Ruling Elite, the awilum [the Haves] . 

■ Edict # 22. "The representative of the king or the local governor who has forced upon the family 
of a worker attached to the king, grain, silver, or wool, in order to make him harvest or perform 
work for his own profit, will be put to death. His victim will keep everything that was given to 

This indicates that coercion of the workers had been attempted by forcing them to take pay and 
then demanding that they do work. The workers would not work for the low pay that the immigration of 
foreign labor had forced upon them, so the land owners were trying to use force to make them work for 
that same low pay. 

Certainly there was no hint of impending doom. The fatal blow, when it fell, came not from 
the troublesome Sealanders or the Kassites but from far to the north in Asia Minor, where the Hittites, 


an Indo-European speaking Aryan people, had created a rapidly growing kingdom. From its capital 
Hattusha, a king named Murshili (1620-1595 BC), a contemporary of Samsu-ditana of Babylon (1626- 
1595 BC), attacked northwestern Syria and then swept down the Euphrates towards Babylon without 
opposition. Murshili must have appeared to the apparently unsuspecting Samsu-ditana like a bolt out of 
the blue. Babylon was sacked and its gods plundered. Thus, the famous First Dynasty of Babylon came to 
a sudden end in 1595 BC.[ 194 ] 

Although Murshili conquered and plundered, he did not stay. His kingdom in Hattiland was 
undergoing political upheavals. So, he gathered up as much loot as he could, including the statues of the 
gods from the temples, and returned to his rebellious kingdom in the cool, tree-covered mountains of 
Anatolia while leaving a power vacuum in Babylonia. 

Into this vacuum, the Kassite forces descended from the Zagros Mountains to take control of 
the capital and to impose their government upon North Babylonia. The Indo-European Kassites who 
had been cheap immigrant labor and small land-owners in Babylonia, rose up and joined their invading 
relatives to establish a Kassite dynasty. This Kassite dynasty , which rapidly adopted much of the culture 
and institutions of Babylonia, lasted about 400 years (1595-1150 BC) and was the longest lasting of any 
dynasty in the history of Mesopotamia. The Kassites united the country after recapturing the south from 
the Sealanders, and restored the Babylonian empire to the glory of Hammurabi's age.[ 195 ] They were 
neither Sumerians nor Semitic Amorites, but they became the rulers of Babylonia. And once again, the 
actual native owners of the land became a dispossessed majority in their own country, either working at 
menial jobs or joining the army to fight and die. 

It should be noted that from the First Dynasty of Babylon (1894 BC) to the end of Babylonian 
history with the Hellenistic influences brought in with the conquests of Alexander the Great (323 BC), 
the possibility of administering the southern half of Babylonia depended to a considerable extent upon 
the co-operation of a few key cities, notably Ur and Uruk. [ 1% ] Ur was an especially important city both 
economically and religiously. It should also be noted that the Biblical city from which the mythological 
figure known as Abraham was born and began his saga, was the city of Ur, that is, "Ur of the Chaldees". 
This designation "Ur of the Chaldees" as found in the Old Testament actually gives evidence that Genesis 
was not written during the time that it claims to have been written since "Ur of the Chaldees" was not 
under Chaldean control until much later - but more on this subject in Volume II, The Monsters of 

These two cities, Ur and Uruk, were not only religious centers but also the commercial centers 
of tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families. Powerful temples were safe places to deposit gold and 
silver under the protection of the gods. It was to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Ur and 
Uruk that the Kassites obtained cheap loans and purchased cheap properties. The tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] of Ur and Uruk did not like the steep taxes imposed by the Sealanders who were 
interfering with their sea trade from the Persian Gulf. So, it was from these two cities that the financing 
was supplied and the plots were hatched to overthrow the Sealands Dynasties. 

You will see this as a recurring theme throughout history where armies destroy every people 
and all property except for that of their allies. The conquering armies of Kassites treated these southern 
cities of Ur and Uruk with honor and refrained from destroying their properties. Some of the Kassite 
kings undertook building operations and other works of piety there. The actual military conquest of the 
Sealands was effected by Ulamburiash, during the reign of his older brother, Kashtiliash III. After serving 
as viceroy or sub-king in the Sealands, Ulamburiash succeeded to the Kassite throne in about 1450 BC. 


In domestic policy Kassite government seems to have been, to judge by existing economic 
documents, mild and un-oppressive. One of the factors which most affected the reaction of the ancient 
city-states to a king was his attitude to the prescriptive rights of their citizens, involving in many cases 


exemption from taxes or corvee duties. Extant charters promulgated by the Kassite kings indicate that 
they were liberal rulers in this respect, and the apparent absence of native up-risings may well have been 
related to this liberality. It may also help to explain the relative ease with which the Aryan Kassites were 
ultimately able to displace the Semitic Sealand dynasty. [ 198 ] They were simply a better people. 

The first Kassite king of Babylon was Agum II, who was credited with recovering the statues of 
the god Marduk and his wife after twenty- four years of Hittite captivity. With Marduk reinstalled in 
his temple in Babylon, the Kassite kings were able to "take the hand of Marduk" - a symbolic gesture 
denoting dynastic legitimacy and respect for Babylonian traditions. They followed the social and religious 
customs of the Babylonians, and they even adopted the Akkadian language. [ 199 ] Babylon remained a 
prestigious and wealthy center of political and commercial power. But, to the immediate north, a more 
powerful rival was growing in might. The Semitic kingdom of Assyria was beginning to arise. 

1700-1674 BC The Hyksos Take Control of Egypt 

Before considering the Assyrian Empire that was growing stronger on the northern borders 
of Babylonia, let's have a look to the west, across the Syrian desert at a different population of these 
Semitic goat rustlers. It is not those Amorites who created the Babylonian and Assyrian empires that we 
shall consider, but their flea-bitten cousins and uncles who were riding their donkeys around Canaan, 
Northern Arabia, Gaza and Goshen in small tribes of bandits and sheep stealers. Historically, they have 
been called the Hyksos, but they were a very different kind of people than what has been assumed of 
them by the historians and archeologists. 

In that geographical area of Canaan and Palestine, simultaneously with the beginnings of the 
history of Assyria, also begins the history of a Semitic people who have never been any more than a fly 
speck on the tail of a donkey. With Semitic craftiness and deceit these people have claimed to be among 
the most ancient - indeed, the very most ancient - of all people on Earth. Little by little, I will weave the 
background of these deceivers into the present history. But first, let's review who these people were. 

If you inspect a map of the distribution of the goat and sheep raising areas with a map of the 
grain growing areas of the ancient Near East, you will see that the land where goats and sheep can forage 
is much more rugged than the lands where grain can be grown. Goats, especially, are famous for being 
able to eat anything. Whether succulent green sprouts in a field of spring greens or the spines of a cactus, 
goats get by on just about any plant that grows. Sheep, too, can forage even barren areas where plants 
grow in mere clumps separated by barren dirt but, of course, they thrive in fields of wild grasses and hay. 
However, to grow crops of grain and vegetables, you need good soil, sufficient water, sun and labor. But 
even the rockiest hills can support goats. 

So, the roaming bands of shepherds who ranged the arid hills and mountains of the ancient Near 
East did so both inside and outside of the boundaries of settled areas of farms and villages. The wild areas 
where the footsteps of Man were seldom found was their abode. As long as they could scare away the 
lions and jackels with their slings and arrows, then their goats and sheep provided them with milk and 
meat, wool and goat hair for weaving, bone and horn for implements and decorations. Living in goat hair 
and woolen tents and traveling by donkey and on foot, they spent their days roaming about the ancient 
Near East in search of water and forage. They did not know how to farm. But even if they had wanted to 
settle into a farming life, by this time in the history of the ancient Near East of 1700 BC, the best farming 
areas had already been settled by other people. 

Over the previous two thousand years, robust civilizations based on agriculture had grown up 
within the grain growing regions. The peoples of Sumeria and Babylonia, Assyria and Ugarit, Hattiland, 
Canaan and Egypt had long held the territories that gave them sustenance. Because the Fertile Crescent, 
the bread basket of the ancient Near East, had for so long been inhabited by farming people, the goat 


herders were mainly restricted to the wilderness. And that was okay with them since their herds provided 
everything that they needed. Or if there was anything that they wanted in the villages and cities, they 
could trade their goats and sheep for salt; trinkets and cooking pots for the wives; bronze daggers and 
swords for the young men. Or they would steal what they could not afford to buy. 

Relying on the hidden paths and difficult terrain of the wilderness for protection, these roaming 
bands of Amorite goat-rustlers, as has been previously stated, were a constant source of anxiety to the 
villages and cities. Surprise raids followed by quick retreat into the trackless wastelands, or stealthy 
stealing into a farm or a village at night to burglarize and run away before discovery, were the favorite 
methods used by these Amorite shepherds. The farming peoples were wary of them but, at the same time, 
wanted to be on the friendliest of terms with them so as to avoid enmity. 

In times of drought where watering holes dried up and the land was too parched even for goats, 
these roaming Semitic shepherds would beg for a place to graze their flocks near to the well-watered 
farming communities. Not just out of compassion, but also out of self-serving politics, these shepherds 
were usually granted permission. This, so as to keep them as docile, peaceable and as friendly as possible 
but also as to not drive them, through hunger and thirst, into a desperation leading to banditry and 
warfare. Between the farmers and the nomads, there was always an uneasy truce broken with sporadic 
banditry and sudden raids followed by punishing expeditions by the king's troops or the local militia 
chasing the shepherds back into the wilderness. 

Birth-control through extended nursing of the children had kept Sumerian populations within 
the natural bounds and the natural needs of a farming people. The mothers of Sumeria practiced natural 
birth control by suckling their children for two years and thus producing families of well-spaced children 
while saving themselves from the exhaustions of child-bearing. The mothers of Egypt nursed their 
children for three years which also kept the sizes of their families small [ 200 ] and produced a slow increase 
in population. But the Semitic Amorites practiced polygamy like their goats. And through their increase 
in numbers from their many wives they quickly became more numerous than the city dwellers. High 
birth-rates, celebrated with the exhortations from their lice-covered priests to "go forth and multiply like 
the sands of the sea" became standard operating procedure for the goat herding nomads who wanted 
to displace the farmers from their land and to make it their own. The wandering Semitic goat rustlers 
celebrated the mothers who produced eight or ten or twelve children just as the Orthodox Jews and 
Hasidics do in modern times and for the very same reasons, to out -breed and out-number the people 
whom they wanted to dispossess. 

In addition to their large families, the interpersonal and inter- tribal relations of their patriarchal 
genealogies gave these wandering tribes the ability to merge with other tribes into larger alliances for war 
and banditry with a minimum of political haggling. When combined, these genealogically related tribes 
gave them sufficient numbers to usually pose a unified threat to the towns and civilized lands. 

Women who married into other tribes, brought with them the stories and genealogies of their 
own tribes in addition to bride gifts. Thus, the clever stratagems and thefts that were famous among their 
own people, became a part of the common lore of the tribes into which these women married. 

Through marriage alliances, previously unrelated tribes could "inherit" each other's asl. In some 
of these patriarchal tribes, it was only the women who were believed to pass along the tribe's asl. This 
allowed the patriarch or "father" of tribe-A to arranged for his daughter to marry into tribe-B. Then, 
because all of her children would "inherit" the asl of tribe-A, he could claim that all of her children 
were actually members of tribe-A. Through marriage, tribe-A could claim the children of and subvert 
tribe-B by falsely claiming that the children of tribe-B had inherited the asl of tribe-A and were therefore 
members of tribe-A. This sorcery was only true because these fly-speckled goat-thieves all believed that 
it was true. So, they parasitically increased their numbers by claiming the children of their daughters 
who married outside of the tribe as the children of the tribe. And why? Because they all had magically 


inherited the same asl. This fake sorcery is still practiced by the Jews in modern times. 

As the Amorites became civilized by taking over the Sumerian cities, their sheep -stealing cousins 
living in tents learned of the ways in which these usurpers had been able to take the wealth of other 
people for themselves. Stories of these clever stratagems became common tradition as these nomads road 
their donkeys and herded their sheep and goats across the hot, dusty grasslands and deserts of the ancient 
Near East. These stratagems were known by these roaming Amorites and, of course, they were known by 
the city-dwelling Amorite merchant-moneylenders who had descended from goat rustlers, themselves. 

With such a background in mind, we shall leave the fall of Babylonia (1595 BC) behind for a 
while and go back a few centuries to around 1700 BC. Assyria had not yet grown into its full power. 
Babylonia was still thriving under Hammurabi's Dynasty but the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
had already undermined the country with the immigrant labor of the Kassites. So Babylon's days were 

The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] knew from vast experience that the internal weakness 
caused by an immigrant population would set the country on the path to destruction. They knew this 
from their long and successful application of Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian Swindle: "Dispossessing 
the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers when the people 
are impoverished." 

The moneylenders and merchants knew that their own people were destroyed and dispossessed 
through the Sumerian Swindle, but the allegiance of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had 
always been to their personal profits above their own people. The Sumerian Swindle had placed them at 
the pinnacle of wealth and they stayed at that apex only through its ruthless application. The Sumerian 
Swindle allowed them to profit from treason. But even as they armed and loaned money to the enemies 
of Babylon in Assyria to the north and to the Sealands in the south, they always needed a place to store 
their silver that would both be safe from theft and would increase in profits. In business, they were 
merciless and cruel. And in hiding their silver, they always sought the protection of the temple treasuries. 

The Sumerian Swindle is an impossible fraud today just as it was then. The Swindle demands 
that there must be paid back more than actually exists. But without a fresh influx of new silver and gold 
into the system, the Swindle breaks down from lack of payments simply because, through interest-on - 
a-loan, the bankers end up with all of the wealth while the People end up with nothing at all while still 
owing even more . Even if the moneylenders could put every single shekel of silver of the entire world 
into their vaults, by the arithmetical numbers on their books, they were still owed even more silver by 
the people who had borrowed from them. So, fresh supplies of silver and gold needed to be brought in 
from some outside source if the swindle is to continue and not come crashing down around the bankers' 
heads. For the moneylenders to continue to thrive, the People must be induced to always work harder to 
obtain more than they need and then give even that to the bankers. Such is the relentless arithmetic of 
the Sumerian Swindle. The People are never allowed to rest from the incessant labor necessary to pay the 
interest-on-the-loan. And if they cannot be induced to work any harder to pay-the-debt, then they must 
be induced to go to war, steal from some other people, and then pay the "debt" with the stolen loot. 

As a parasitic class, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] profited as the middlemen in all 
financial transactions, gaining a percentage every time money or goods passed through their hands. But 
as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Babylonia absorbed silver as debt-payments, there was 
less silver in circulation and business slowed down which meant less profits. As parasites, they could not 
kill their victims entirely, so something needed to be done to keep both the People and the Swindle alive. 

Only by seizing a supply of bullion from a source outside of the moneylenders' ownership 
could the Swindle be resuscitated with such an "economic stimulus package". Free silver would have 
to be made available to the people so that they could give it to the moneylenders as payments for their 
debt-slavery and so that they could further profit the merchants by buying the goods imported by the 


merchant-moneylenders cartels. Business profits could not be allowed to diminish simply because the 
moneylenders had all of the silver in their strong rooms. Once the moneylenders possessed most of the 
silver from the entire country, then silver belonging to somebody else's country would have to be seized. 
And the most profitable way to get what you didn't earn, was through the thievery of war. 

All of the wars between Sumer and Akkad or between Babylonia and the hill countries had 
reached an account book balance by merely shifting silver from one side to the other and back again 
among the moneylender families. There was very little net increase in the total amount of bullion since all 
that the silver did was to change hands as booty. Unless an outside source of bullion could be found, the 
astronomically growing numbers in the account books would force a decline in business from a lack of 
circulating silver. 

These moneylender families were now the richest families in both Babylonia and Assyria. Even 
though they were all related by marriage and by partnerships through their business guilds, competition 
between these families was fierce. They, too, were driven by the fraudulent arithmetic of lending- 
at-interest to seek ever higher profits. And yet, the total sum of silver in all of Mesopotamia was not 
increasing fast enough to pay the debt-service fees even from what could be smelted from the slave-labor 
mines, all of which were located in distant lands. 

So, the Babylonian merchants and moneylenders needed a fresh source of gold and silver but 
not from mines that had to be worked with slaves and slowly extracted over time. They needed gold and 
silver bullion that was already smelted and waiting to be seized. In the ancient near East, the only huge 
source of such wealth was the ancient land of Egypt, a land that had never known foreign conquest and 
which had been accumulating gold in its temples, palaces and tombs for nearly two thousand years. 

What was even more unique about Egypt was that it had reached a high level of civilization 
without any money. Unlike the Mesopotamian empires, Egypt did not need nor did it use money and 
neither did it have any guilds of moneylenders parasitizing the wealth and sucking it away to distant 
lands. All of Egypt's gold, silver and gem stones were still in the country and in quantities derived from 
over two thousand years of hoarding. 

Egypt was a theocracy similar to the earliest God-conscious civilization in Sumeria, basing its 
culture upon knowledge of and service to God. Its public administration and theocratic structure had 
never been subjected to the intrigues and wars caused by a money system controlled by private financiers 
such as had occured in Mesopotamia. 

Modern archeologists all know that ancient Egypt was a land where nothing was more important 
to the Egyptian People than religion. This is how it had originally been for Sumeria, too, before the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] betrayed the People. The entire Egyptian culture revolved around 
the gods. The People lived because the gods gave them life and they expressed their religious resolve and 
piety in every moment of every day with prayer and joy. This religious consciousness was extended even 
to their kings who were believed to be not just a representative of god on earth, but actually a living god 
incarnate. With the Pharaoh as a god whose duty it was to protect and to administer for his people, Egypt 
prospered and the People enjoyed a great spiritual power. 

The name, "Pharaoh", means "Great House". Thus, the Pharaoh was the Great House in which his 
people lived. [ 201 ] When a new king arose, he made a royal procession to all of the ancient shrines and 
assured the various religious orders that he would respect their priviledges and increase them. As part of 
the ancient tradition, in the first or second year of his reign, Pharaoh set out to raid some near-by country 
in order to show the nations around that he was a mighty warrior as well as a god. He fought in person 
and the custom demanded that he should slay a number of prisoners with his own hand. Representatives 
of the vanquished peoples or tribes were made to kneel before him with their arms tied together at the 
elbows and behind their backs, and the pharaoh smashed in their skulls with a stone-headed or a copper- 
headed mace or he cut off their heads with a bronze or copper scimitar. [ 202 ] These events were celebrated 


on temple walls in huge bas reliefs showing the pharaoh accomplishing these feats. 

However, this was all mainly a religious ceremony and a political propaganda show- of- strength 
to frighten off would-be aggressors. The history of Egypt shows clearly that the Egyptians, as a nation, 
were wholly lacking in military spirit and that they abhorred war. Whenever it was necessary to do so, 
they were ready to fight in a primitive fashion for their fields and canals and homes. But for the defense 
of their country as a whole they were by nature and by temperament more interested in their religious 
life and their peaceful meditations upon Eternity. They had no national spirit at all, at least under the 
Old Kingdom (-2700-2200 BC) and the Middle Kingdom (-2130-1640 BC). And even under the 
New Kingdom (-1550-1085 BC), the principal object of all of their raids and so-called "wars" was the 
acquisition of booty and prisoners and the establishment of Egyptian borders. 

Such short shows of military aggression were also necessary to maintain the longer peace. Even 
though the Nile River is 3,473 miles long, that portion of the Nile Valley which is Egypt and which is 600 
miles long, lay open on both sides of the Nile to the attacks of the warlike bandits of the deserts. Invasion 
from the north and south was always easy for a determined foe since natural geographic barriers from 
those directions were few. In all of their thousands of years of history, Egypt never possessed anything 
that could be called a "standing army" until the beginning of the New Kingdom after the Hyksos had 
been expelled. [ 203 ] 

From the earliest days, Egyptians lived in mud-brick houses. Once again, modern people can 
learn a lot from the ancient peoples even in this respect. Everyone who has lived for any length of time 
in either Egypt or Mesopotamia will admit that, provided the walls are thick enough, mud-brick houses 
are preferable to those built according to the European models. [ 204 ] And they are completely eco-friendly 
and re-cyclable mud, unlike the synthetic trash which is the construction materials of the modern house. 

The heavy rains that fall in Sudan and Abyssinia cause the Nile to rise about the middle of June 
and to crest sometime in October after which the planting season begins. The principal crops were wheat, 
barley, beans, lentils, millet, vetches, lupins, clover, flax, cotton, cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions, dates, 
pomegranate, carobs, figs and papyrus. In all periods, the Egyptians were primarily vegetarians in diet 
though, of course, various large and small cattle, fish, ducks and geese were also eaten. [ 205 ] 

The average Egyptian was by nature a cheerful, joyous person, fond of amusement and pleasure 
and his greatest desire was to "make a good day", to eat, drink and be merry. They loved to assemble in 
the "house of beer" and gossip with their friends. [ 206 ] But unlike in Mesopotamia these were not taverns 
owned by the moneylenders because Egypt did not have a need for money. As a joyous and religious 
people, they bartered in good faith with one another. Workers were paid in rations such as was common 
in Sumeria before the moneylenders betrayed the People with the Sumerian Swindle. 

But as much as they enjoyed life and as much as they liked to party and rejoice, they were, 
after all, a religious people whose main preoccupation in Life was to attain a happy Here-After in the 
immortal realm of the gods. Their priests helped them to achieve this through the secret methods that 
are explained in Volume Two. And as a religious reminder, it was the custom that even during the most 
happy occasions, one of the songs that was always sung at even the happiest party was a dirge, a dirge 
to remind them all that however much they were enjoying themselves at that moment, the day would 
assuredly come when they each must die. Can modern people be so wise or so courageous in facing Life 
and Death as the ancient Egyptians? 

Dirge to be Sung in the Middle of Parties and Celebrations: 
"O beneficent Prince, it is a decree, 
And what has been ordained by this decree is good: 
That the bodies of men shall pass away and disappear, 
And that others shall abide in succession to them. 


I have heard the words of the scribe Imhotep and Hertataf, the pyramid builder, 

Which, because they wrote them, are treasured beyond everything. 

Consider what hath happened to their tombs; 

Their walls have been thrown down, 

Their places can no longer be seen. 

It is just as if they had never existed. 

And consider also, none cometh from where they are 

To describe their state in the After Life. 

Or to tell us of their surroundings, 

Or to comfort our hearts, 

Or to guide us to the place whither they have gone. 

Anoint thy head with scented unguents, 

Array thyself in apparel made of byssus, 

Steep thy body in precious perfumes, 

Which are indeed the emanations of the gods. 

Occupy thyself with thy pleasures day by day 

And cease not to search out enjoyment for thyself. 

Man is not permitted to carry his goods away with him. 

Never hath existed the man who, once departed, 

Was able to return to earth again. 

Follow thy heart's desire, 

Search out happiness for thyself, 

Order thy affairs on earth so that they may 

Minister to the desire of thy heart. 

For at length, the day of lamentation shall come, 

When the dead shall not hear the lamentations, 

And the cries of grief shall never make to beat again 

The heart of him who is in the grave. 

Therefore, comfort thy heart, forget these things. 

The best thing for thee to do for thyself is to seek 

To attain thy heart's desire as long as thou livest." [ 207 ] 

As you can see from this Dirge, the religion of the Egyptians offers very much the same advice 
that the Sumerian priests offered their own people in such works as the Epic of Gilgamesh. After all, such 
religious truths are universal. The Egyptians would sing their Dirge in the middle of their most joyous 
parties as a reminder of their duties to their gods and to their very souls. Life is fleeting, enjoy it while 
you can and do your duty to God so that you may have everlasting life. 

The moneylenders of Babylonia also shared this philosophy about enjoying Life except for the 
last part; they did not believe in an everlasting life. So, whatever evils that they did in this life for their 
own pleasure and however so many people they destroyed for their own benefit didn't matter to them as 
long as they got what they wanted. These Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were a much 
different people - ruthless, materialistic Semites who envied the gold of the god-conscious Egyptians. 

Throughout Egyptian history, the Egyptian was both by nature and by habit a moral and religious 
person. But he was also extremely practical because the aim of all his moral and religious efforts was to 
secure for himself ease, comfort and prosperity in this world and a life of everlasting joy and happiness in 
the next world. [ 208 ] Can the modern Christians, Buddhists or Hindus ask for any more from their own 


Like the beliefs of other ancient peoples throughout most of the world at that time, Egyptians 
believed that every locality had its own resident gods. These gods could be flattered, cajoled, begged and 
wheedled into granting requests and bribed with offerings. Offerings became a principal act of worship 
at all periods of Egyptian history. [ 209 ] With offerings, the temples thereby became wealthy. Offerings and 
donations are a reflection of the piety of the people throughout the ancient times up to the present. They 
are a result of simple religious devotion common to all religions and to all people. A material offering is a 
giving up of material goods and an acceptance of spiritual life. Making offerings to God is an act of pious 
contrition and devoted love. It is a necessary act of worship. 

To help them understand their duties to the gods, a very large religious system had evolved in 
Egypt. As one example, the employees of just one temple, the Temple of Amon in the reign of Rameses 
III, numbered 62,626 persons which shows that the cult was in actuality a social and family system that 
supported not only the temple staff but the families of the priests and all employees as well. A detailed list 
of the offerings that Rameses III made to the temples of Thebes, Abydos and Heliopolis and the amount 
of food and gifts was truly huge. [ 210 ] 

The Egyptian priests were genuine devotees and not mere loafers and parasites of society. Not 
only did they offer their people solace and wisdom but the priests of Egypt had some very real mental 
and spiritual powers aside from the reputed magical powers for which they were famous throughout 
the Near East. The Egyptian texts make it quite clear that the priests possessed spiritual, occult and 
psychological powers of a remarkable character. But for the ordinary Egyptian - just as in Mesopotamia 
- the road to success and prosperity could only be traversed by knowing how to read and write. Thus, 
extraordinary respect was paid to the profession of the scribe and to the scribe, himself. [ 2U ] It is what the 
scribes wrote about their priests that unlocks the ancient myths and mysteries. 

Some of this will sound familiar to you if you have read the Old Testament. For example, one 
of the priests of Egypt was supposed to have had the power "of dividing the water in a lake into two 
parts and making one part to stand on the other." [ 212 ] And you will also be familiar with a trick that the 
Egyptian sorcerers could do by changing a rod into a snake. By pressing a part of the neck of a cobra it 
could be made to straighten itself like a rod, and when the pressure was removed, the creature assumed 
its normal form once again. [ 213 ] This should sound familiar to those who have read the Old Testament 
since these were Egyptian stories that were older than the Hebrews. 

But the Egyptian religion was not just a collection of conjuror's tricks to impress the country 
bumpkins. It contained a fully developed knowledge of the spiritual powers of Mankind. The religious 
texts found on the walls of tombs and temples, sarcophagi and surviving papyri show that the Egyptians 
throughout their long history worshipped everything from stones and mountains to birds, beasts and 
reptiles. These facts in the benighted blindness of the atheistic modern scientists and Jews, has led to 
the false assumption that the ancient Egyptians were pagan and idolatrous fools. After all, what modern 
person in their right mind would worship a rock or a cat? 

However, it is not wise for modern people to scoff at the Egyptian religion because the 
Egyptians had some special knowledge and secret powers that modern people are lacking. The key to 
such knowledge is most easily understood by those modern Asian people who know their own "chi" 
(pronounced "chee" and also spelled "qi"). This spiritual power is fully discussed in Volume Two, The 
Monsters of Babylon. 

This natural energy field and mental attribute is naturally possessed by all people but it is only 
recognized and controlled by those few who have been able to tap into their own spiritual powers. 
Modern martial artists, tai chi chuan adepts, qi gong practitioners and the cultivators of meditation 
and acupuncture are very conversant with this energy field and spiritual power. That modern scientists 
are not, is the reason that none of the archeologists have ever been able to understand the real secrets 
of ancient Egypt - or of any other ancient civilization for that matter. Modern scientists lack the 


fundamental, human, spiritual skills necessary. 

For example, the Egyptians as well as the sacred artists of later millennia who painted and 
sculpted the Hindu, Buddhist and Christian gods, goddesses and saints very often painted them 
surrounded by halos, beams of light and rings of flames. In those religious cultures, too, the holy light 
that radiates from a spiritually elevated person was represented in such ways - halos, auras and beams 
of light. But even though the original artist could see and experience those spiritual energies, and even 
though he could represent it in artistic form, those representations mean nothing to modern scientists 
because modern people have lost their spiritual awareness and insight. 

Modern scientists believe (since they do not know) that the auras, halos, beams of light and rings 
of fire in the Buddhist, Hindu and Christian art (as well as their representation in Egyptian, Assyrian and 
Sumerian art), are only an artistic "convention" for of indicating a special religious status of those beings 
who are represented. But the scientists don't understand that such artistic techniques are, in fact, true 
representations of actual phenomenon , phenomenon that the scientists could experience for themselves 
if they would try 

Stories from Mesopotamia of Marduk wrapping his aura around him, was expressing an actual 
knowledge of auras. It was not a poetic dream. The Buddhist, Hindu and Christian painters and sculptors 
of later times, likewise, were representing what they could see with their own eyes, the halos radiating 
from their teachers and holy men. The Egyptian artists also expressed their own spiritual abilities as 
well as the spiritual attainment of their people by painting and sculpting them in holy ways. But modern 
scientists assume that such representations were a standardized artistic device rather than the records of 
an actual observation. This misconception by modern science as well as the secrets of Egyptian spiritual 
power are fully discussed in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon. 

Another special power of the Egyptians was represented in the reddish color that the Egyptian 
artists used in their paintings of skin tone for Egyptian wall reliefs and papyrus scrolls. The reddish color 
was not used for representing any other people. The Egyptians always painted themselves as having a 
reddish-colored skin as opposed to other peoples who were depicted in their art as having white, brown, 
tawny, yellow or black complexions. The pasty-faced modern scientists who venture into the bright 
sunshine of Egypt, suffer sunburn. And so they opine that the ancient Egyptians were red because they 
were sunburned and could never get sun-tanned. Why the brown, modern Egyptians are not red in color 
is ignored because it upsets the ridiculous scientific theory that the sun-burned scientists have while they 
smear sun-block over their sunburns. 

The ancient Egyptians represented themselves as reddish in color because their spiritual 
knowledge - which was based upon the deep, meditational breathing methods that only they knew - 
gave them a fully oxygenated blood supply which showed through their skin as a reddish hue. This deep 
breathing skill that the priests taught to their people can readily be seen in their pictures where-in the 
lower abdomen of a cultivator of meditation is obvious. With deep breathing and the circulation of their 
vital energies, the Egyptians were able to achieve the spiritual and occult powers for which they were so 
famous. This is fully explained in Volume Two. 

Egypt's high spiritual attainments were not lost upon the other people of the ancient Near East 
who held the Egyptians in high regard and awe. Their spiritual power was evident to anyone who met 
them. Their noble spirits and peaceful contentment went with them wherever they traveled. But, in 
general, Egyptians did not travel much. Protected by their deserts and nurtured by the Nile, they had 
just about everything that they needed. And because Upper Egypt also provided gold, the Egyptians had, 
along with abundant grain harvests, the wealth to trade for anything that they wanted. 

But with all of its great wealth, religious attainments and contentment of the People, there was 
one thing that Egypt did not have even after its first two thousand years of high civilization. Egypt did not 
have nor did it use any money. 


The Sumeria culture was older than Egyptian culture by a couple of hundred years. And while the 
Sumerian Swindle and the use of silver as a means of commercial exchange had been ravaging all of the 
people of the entire ancient Near East for all of this time, in the dry deserts and silent vastnesses of Egypt, 
the monumental temples and vast architectural wonders of those great people were all built without using 
money. It is not that the people were poor - far from it. They were not poor at all. Egypt was extremely 
rich because the People had the Eight Essentials of Life. But Egypt did not use money because money is 
not one of the Eight Essentials of Life. Money is just a tool for increasing the efficiency of commerce. It is 
not necessary for Life and it is not necessary for high culture, as ancient Sumeria and ancient Egypt are 
an example. Money is only necessary to the ones who profit most from the use of money, the rapacious 
moneylenders and the greedy merchants . It is not something that anyone else actually needs. Instead of 
money, the Egyptian people were paid for their work with rations of grain. With grain as their take-home 
pay, they could barter for whatever else they wanted. 

Without using money, the merchants of Egypt were content to sail up and down the Nile to barter 
their wares from town to town. Such items that were needed by the pharaoh or by the temples such as 
cedar wood from Lebanon or curiosities from the land of Punt, were commissioned to official envoys 
who undertook trade expeditions. But in general, Egypt was a country that did not encourage or invite 
visitors from foreign lands. The peace and tranquility of their spiritual attainment and the bounty of their 
Nile-fed lands, were all that the Egyptians needed and all that they wanted. Above all, God-consciousness 
gave them bliss. So, the greedy and covetous visitors from foreign lands were not encouraged to stay long. 
Egypt was all that the Egyptians desired because that was enough. 

From pre-dynastic times onwards, Egypt had contacts with Mesopotamia. But such relations were 
of little economic importance because both desert countries had few natural resources. Babylonia had 
nothing that Egypt needed. And the only thing that Egypt had which Babylonia wanted was gold. 

Egypt obtained gold and exotic goods like ebony wood from Nubia. The Sinai Peninsula which 
was annexed during the Old Kingdom (-2700-2200 BC) provided copper mines. The only import Egypt 
really needed was the trade in wood which was a necessity for the building of temples, ships, furniture 
etc. Wood was of inferior quality and in short supply in the desert lands of Egypt. So, during the Old 
Kingdom, Egypt began a special relationship with Byblos on the Lebanese coast. Byblos became one of its 
closest allies for almost two millennia. The imported wood of Lebanon was critical to the development of 
a navy capable of defending the country and for the boats that plied the Nile. 

Egypt traded with the African interior both overland through Kush and by ship via the Red Sea 
and the Gulf of Aden. The fabled land of Punt was located somewhere on the coast of modern Somalia 
or, more likely, southern Sudan or Ethiopia where the indigenous plants and animals equate most closely 
with those depicted in the Egyptian bas relief and paintings. 

Punt was a commercial center for goods not only from within its own borders, but from 
elsewhere in Africa. Here, the Egyptians sought and found incense, ivory, ebony and gum, myrrh resin 
and live myrrh trees, gold, cinnamon wood, cypress wood, perfumes and kohl eye-cosmetics, apes, 
monkeys, baboons, dogs, the skins of giraffes, panthers and cheetahs (which were worn by temple 
priests), and sometimes the live animals themselves. 

Arabia likewise had overland and overseas connections with Egypt. The ships of Babylonia 
navigated around the Arabian Peninsula to trade with Punt and with Egypt. So, although there was not a 
lot of trade between Egypt and Mesopotamia, the Babylonian merchants were well informed of the riches 
and the trade goods available in that desert land. And no city in Babylonia was better situated to trade 
with Egypt, Arabia and Africa than was the river city of Ur where all ship traffic from the Persian Gulf 
was off-loaded onto river craft. 

Despite the cataracts of the Nile, the storms on the Mediterranean and Red Sea, and the difficulty 
and expense of keeping the canal connecting the Nile and the Red Sea in good repair, the cheapest and 


fastest way of transporting merchandise was by ship. The alternatives were the routes crossing the Eastern 
and Western Desert. These caravan routes through the Negev and the Libyan Desert were difficult to 
administer because these vast deserts were impossible to patrol efficiently. Caravans could be swallowed 
up and never heard from again, or nomads and merchants could take circuitous routes to avoid contact 
with military patrols. And so, Egypt only had partial success in controlling the flow of goods from Africa 
to the Near East. And from Punt, the Babylonian merchants could get African goods without an Egyptian 

The traveling Babylonian merchants who were allowed entry into Egypt were amazed. The huge 
pyramids and gargantuan statues of the pharaohs and gods, the monuments and temples carved out 
of solid rock and built of granite and other durable stones of marvelous hues, the temple interiors gold 
plated and set with precious stones, were amazing. Because the Babylonian merchants who visited Egypt 
were all members of the same trade guilds, what they saw in Egypt was personally reported during 
their guild meetings. This information was carefully cross-referenced with other reports and used for 
calculating the value of the temples, the palaces and the population of Egypt, all equated to shekels of 
silver and enumerated upon the clay tablets. 

To the dismay of the merchant-moneylenders, they knew that Egypt's gold could neither be 
obtained through the Sumerian Swindle since Egypt did not use money nor by trade since there was 
nothing that Egypt needed that the Babylonian tamkarum had. But there was another way to bring 
Egyptian gold into the Babylonian temple treasuries. And that was through the well-tested mechanism of 

The moneylenders of Babylonia had established their trade guilds in every commercial city, town 
and port in the ancient Near East. These guild halls and taverns were not just places of business but also 
provided their members with food and living accommodations for weary travelers. These enterprises 
were well-staffed with their numerous relatives and hirelings. The bribed officials in their pay kept good 
contact with the king and the temple priests, so the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] always knew 
the political climate. Through their network of spies and with crafty calculation, the moneylenders knew 
that neither Babylonia nor the rapidly growing empire of Assyria to the north had the manpower or the 
inclination to take the wealth of Egypt by force because they were too busy defending their land from 
surrounding tribes and vying with one another for supremacy. And so, the moneylenders devised a plan 
for getting Egyptian gold that did not require the armies of either Babylonia or Assyria. 

The tamkarum guilds knew that within the extended families and genealogical tribal connections 
of their own Amorite people who were scattered across the entire Near East, that they had the manpower 
to challenge Egypt. They had traveled the trade routes that went directly through Egypt and up the Nile 
River, so they knew where Egypt was strong and where she was weak. In addition, they also knew the 
trade route that went directly from the land of Punt on the Somali coast, northward over the desert, 
through the Negro lands of Kush and Nubia to link up with the Upper Nile above the sixth cataract. 
So, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had the same strategic military advantage over Egypt that 
they had over the kings of Assyria and Babylonia. That is, the trade routes were greater in size than the 
individual kingdoms. They could out-maneuver the armies of the nations because their trade territories 
both surrounded and penetrated them. Also, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had the advantage 
of working in secret while pretending to be harmless merchants, merchants who could trade both with 
the Egyptians as well as with the enemies of the Egyptians, in this case, the Negro tribes of Nubia. 

Additionally, the Semitic Babylonians had their relatives already living in Egypt. The distant 
relatives of the Babylonian moneylenders had been living in the Nile Delta region for centuries. At a 
place called Ma'adi, just south of present day Cairo, lived clans of West Semitic tribesmen who had been 
there since before the First Dynasty pharaohs. Sun-dried bricks, a characteristic Mesopotamian building 
material, were first employed in Egypt at Ma'adi. The use of the distinctly Mesopotamian cylinder 


seal was introduced there. And traces of writing that bore a marked resemblance to the cuneiform of 
Mesopotamia was used there. 

Also, the donkey was alien to Egypt. The Egyptians, in fact, had no pack animals during the 
entire Pre-dynastic period. But donkeys were conspicuously present in Ma'adi. The earliest remains of 
donkeys were found in the various Semitic communities in the Delta region. Significant evidence of 
trade both with the Near East and Nubia was found among the artifacts recovered from its ruins. And 
the Ma'adians were not only experts in animal husbandry but were also accomplished metallurgists and 
craftsmen. A copper axe-head spoiled in casting along with masses of copper ore indicate that copper 
was being processed at Ma'adi. Ma'adi is the oldest site in Northern Egypt in which copper artifacts have 
been found. The people of Ma'adi were among the many communities of Near East peoples who had been 
active in Northern Egypt at the time it was first invaded and annexed by the kings of the First Dynasty. 
By that time, those Asiatic traders had already threaded their way past the indigenous Egyptians of Upper 
Egypt by boat and donkey to trade directly with the Nubians. 

Thus, the moneylenders of Babylonia had already had relatives and trade partners inside Egypt 
for centuries. They knew the weaknesses of Egypt. In addition to their vast wealth, the Babylonian 
moneylenders had access to the advanced weapons that would give them victory - the compound bow, 
the chariot, horse cavalry, vast supplies of bronze swords and maces and the hire of any number of 
mercenaries who were eager to pay off their debt-slavery and to gain the pay and the promise of loot that 
the moneylenders offered. And the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had control of the city of Ur 
where all trade goods through the Persian Gulf were both imported and exported. Large shipments of 
arms could be transported with a false destination to Oman or India and then carried instead to Africa 
and the Sinai without the Babylonian kings being alerted. 

But it was the mercenaries who were the key to success - thousands of honest men who believed 
that the honorable thing to do was to pay off their debts to the dishonest and dishonorable moneylenders 
rather than to hang the moneylenders. Thousands of honest men who were deceived enough to risk 
their lives in a warfare created by the moneylenders rather than to face starvation and poverty at home, 
a poverty that was also created by the moneylenders, these formed the backbone of the merchants' army. 
These men were the willing soldiers of the treasonous moneylenders. 

Why should such men think any differently since this was "how it had always been"? The rich 
deceiving the poor into committing atrocities and sacrificing their lives so that the rich could become 
richer! This is how it had always been. With the money that the poor farmers and shepherds could 
make fighting in Egypt, they could pay off their debts to the moneylenders and buy some land from 
the moneylenders and build a farm which would eventually be foreclosed and confiscated by the 
moneylenders. So, why not fight for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] ? 

In this way, the subtle snake of the Sumerian Swindle spread its corrupting influence into another 
country that was devoted to God. The profiteers of the Sumerian Swindle cast their greedy gaze upon the 
gold of Egypt and desired it for themselves. 

For the first time, the moneylenders of Babylonia, experienced as they were in secrecy and 
subversion, began their quest for the loot of Egypt without the protective influence of the kings. In all 
previous wars in Mesopotamia, they had stationed themselves safely behind the kings giving loans and 
selling war material and providing military intelligence from their network of spies. For now, both the 
kings of Babylonia and the kings of Assyria were too busy with their own empires to look beyond their 
own borders. They had enough affairs-of-state to keep them busy. But there was an opportunity in Egypt 
that could not await the Babylonian kings. 

Time was of the essence and the opportunity would not last indefinitely. The merchant-spies 
in the caravans had carefully informed the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of the 
situation in Egypt, a rich country filled with gold, its people happy with their knowledge of the Gods and 


unheeding of any external threats to their contemplations of immortality and eternity Indeed, Egypt had 
no external threats. The Negroes of Nubia and the Libyans were properly awed and subdued to Egyptian 
might. Assyria and Babylonia were too far away and too pre-occupied with their own problems. Why 
would Egypt fear them? Why would Egypt fear attack from any of its neighbors? Thus, Egypt was ripe for 
the plucking, a perfect victim of the ruthless moneylenders whose only god was silver and gold. 

The moneylenders had the wealth of Babylonia in their strong rooms and on deposit in the 
temples. If they could not manufacture weapons in their own factories scattered around the Near East, 
then they could buy the very best of whatever weapons they needed from other guild members. They 
could hire and inveigle any number of mercenaries. They could rally vast numbers of their genealogically 
connected tribal groups into war alliances. Their spies and sleeper cells in Egypt were stationed at every 
trading post between the Delta and Kush. They could persuade and bribe the Negroes of Nubia to join 
them. They already knew where Egypt was strong and where she was weak. The tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] guilds decided to subvert and attack Egypt using their own resources and to seize the 
throne of Pharaoh for themselves. They had no need of the power of the kings. 

Moving men and material takes a lot of time but the logistics of such an undertaking was all part 
of their skills as import-export merchants. Training, arming and organizing troops also takes a lot of time 
and for this their mercenary generals, hired for good wages, were adept. Organized into small armies 
scattered among the various cities of Canaan and Syria, they could train their soldiers without arousing 
the interest or suspicion of the great kings of Babylonia or Assyria. Such small scattered armies were 
outside of the territory of the great dynasties of Mesopotamia and too small to offer any potential threat 
that would arouse a pre-emptive military conflict. And Egypt, in rapt contemplation of Eternity, was 
oblivious to any such preparations and any such danger. 

By using the Babylonian calendar, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] organized the timing 
of their conspiracy over the necessary three years. The trade winds for their ships, the distances along the 
trade routes, the timing of troop and material transport, and the costs could all be calculated. The assault 
upon Egypt was staged as a two-pronged attack. 

First, through their teams of traveling peddlers and merchants, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] made secret agreements and alliances with the Amorite tribes of roaming shepherds 
throughout Sinai and Canaan. Advance teams were paid and directed to begin moving their flocks into 
the region around Ma'adi to visit their relatives and to occupy territory. The greater number of tribes in 
Sinai and Canaan agreed to move their flocks closer to Egypt. It was not to be a stampede but rather a 
gradual gathering of the tribes over a two year period aimed at concentrating their forces in those areas. 
The goal of the best liars among them was to beg their way into Egypt by claiming that they needed better 
grazing for their flocks. By deceiving the Egyptians and playing upon their kind-heartedness; and then 
residing upon Egyptian Delta lands while remaining as humble as possible, they occupied and held the 
territory until the day of slaughter. 

Second, the tamkarum trade routes down the Persian Gulf, around Arabia to the Somali land 
of Punt and then across the desert to the Negro lands of Kush, were an open highway. The Negro tribes 
of Kush had fought the Egyptians for centuries. Usually, the Egyptians won, taking slaves and gold and 
leaving with unequal treaties involving the payment of tribute. Kush was rich in gold as well as animal 
skins and ivory. Once the chiefs of these primitive Negro tribes had agreed to attack Egypt on a certain 
date, numbered by the sun and moon cycles, the second prong of the attack was set. 

It was a simple operation. Even though hundreds and thousands of miles separated the 
participants, all of them could be coordinated through their genealogical ties and through the Babylonian 
calendar, counting down the moon phases and solar years. 

When the agreed upon moon cycle rolled around, two things happened. First, and on schedule, 
the wild tribes of Nubia and Kush "spontaneously" rose up against Egypt. This caused the pharaoh 


to order his troops and all available manpower southward to fight the Nubian insurgency. The 
approximate time that it took for such a movement of men and boats up-river, was already known by 
the moneylenders. For example, the distance between the Delta and Thebes could be covered by boat in 
about 16 days. And an army could be marched across the deserts of Canaan under the best conditions 
about 200 kilometers in 9 days. These speeds were known factors. Using such approximations, the entire 
time it would take for the pharaoh's army to reach Nubia could be calculated. Once that time had passed, 
they knew that Lower Egypt and the Delta would be emptied of fighting men and defenders. By timing 
each platoon and each tribe to the moon cycles, stage two was initiated and the small groups of dispersed 
troops of mercenaries under their generals began converging upon Egypt from Canaan and Sinai. It was 
at that second moon-cycle that the mercenary generals had their orders to enter and attack Egypt and to 
arm the tribes of shepherds and goat-rustlers who had already infiltrated Goshen and the Delta region 
over the previous two years. 

Egypt was quickly overrun. Not only were her soldiers all in Upper Egypt fighting the Nubians 
but the weapons that the Mesopotamian moneylenders used were the very latest and best and too 
expensive for poor shepherds to buy. Things that the Egyptians had never seen before were brought into 
action, improved battle axes were given to every shepherd as well as copper-headed maces. The powerful 
compound bows with copper or bronze arrow-heads gave the shepherds and soldiers a much greater 
killing range than the simple bows of the Egyptians. But most terrifying of all were the expensive horses 
and chariots which could carry bowmen and spearmen swiftly into the fray to trample the screaming old 
Egyptian farmers and boys into the dust. 

Without their fighting men to protect them, the Egyptians were swiftly subdued, mainly without 
a fight. With the Pharaoh and his army drawn away to Kush, the Amorite tribes of shepherds and their 
tamkarum generals merely filled in the Nile valley behind him with their troops. So, the Egyptians were 
not subdued by a ragtag bunch of poor shepherds but rather by numerous tribes of poor shepherds 
armed with the latest and most advanced weapons of the age and backed by professional soldiers and 
experts in military tactics. It was not simple shepherds alone who built the forts with the advanced 
fortification techniques that they introduced into Egypt. The shepherds had a lot of help. All it took was 
money, patience, planning and scheming ruthlessness, all of which the moneylenders of Babylonia had in 

As the Egyptian historian, Manetho (~ 300 BC), wrote, as quoted by Josephus: 

"Under a king of ours named Tutimaeus God became angry with us, I know not how, and there 
came, after a surprising manner, men of obscure birth from the east, and had the temerity to invade our 
country, and easily conquered it by force, as we did not do battle against them. After they had subdued 
our rulers, they burnt down our cities, and destroyed the temples of the gods, and treated the inhabitants 
most cruelly; killing some and enslaving their wives and their children. 

"Then they made one of their own king. His name was Salatis; he lived at Memphis, and both the 
upper and lower regions had to pay tribute to him. He installed garrisons in places that were the most 
suited for them. His main aim was to make the eastern parts safe, expecting the Assyrians, at the height 
of their power, to covet his kingdom, and invade it. In the Saite Nome there was a city very proper for this 
purpose, by the Bubastic arm of the Nile. With regard to a certain theological notion it was called Avaris. 
He rebuilt and strengthened this city by surrounding it with walls and by stationing a large garrison of 
two hundred and forty thousand armed men there. Salitis came there in the summer, to gather grain in 
order to pay his soldiers, and to exercise his men, and thus to terrify foreigners. 

"After a reign of thirteen years, he was followed by one whose name was Beon, who ruled for 
forty-four years. After him reigned Apachnas for thirty-six years and seven months. After him Apophis 
was king for sixty-one years, followed by Janins for fifty years and one month. After all of these, Assis 
reigned during forty-nine years and two months. These six were their first kings. They all along waged 


war against the Egyptians, and wanted to destroy them to the very roots." [ 2U ] 

These invaders, Manetho called Hyksos or Shepherd Kings. But it was not against the growing 
power of Assyria that the Hyksos had built walls nor was it against the strong but relatively small Dynasty 
of Babylonia far across the Syrian Desert. It was for the protection of their loot that they built the fortified 
city of Avaris on the eastern Delta. Located on the Bubastic eastern arm of the Nile Delta, it offered both 
river transportation throughout Egypt and the Mediterranean Sea as well as a strategic location on the 
caravan routes leading out of Egypt. 

Until the takeover of Lower Egypt by the Hyksos, most conflicts that the Egyptians had fought 
had been civil wars. These were mainly armies of conscripted peasants and artisans led by noblemen 
opposed each other. Or they had exercised relatively short raids and skirmishes in their campaigns south 
into Nubia to extend the southern borders of the realm. Or they had campaigned toward the east and 
west into the desert regions toward Libya. Large scale battles where the entire country was at stake was 
a concept new to the Egyptians. They had never fought such a war. However, for the moneylenders of 
Babylonia, subverting and seizing entire countries with the coordination of their guilds and extended 
families, was big business and business-as-usual. 

Although the Egyptian historian Manetho translated the Greek word "Hyksos" as "king- 
shepherds" or "shepherd kings," he was describing the obvious majority of the foot-soldiers of these 
people who were simple goat rustlers and sheep herders. Today the term "Hyksos" has come to refer to 
the whole of these people who ruled Egypt during the Second Intermediate Period of Egypt's ancient 
history. But the word conceals the two basic divisions within this group, that is, the rulers and the ruled. 
Manetho was not describing their leaders who, true to form, remained a minority hidden behind those 
whom they ruled. He was describing the vast majority composed of stinking goat rustlers and sheep 

The Egyptian term, "Aamu" was used to distinguish the Hyksos from Egyptians. Egyptologists 
conventionally translate "aamu" as "asiatics". Contemporary Egyptians during the Hyksos invasion called 
them "hikau khausut", which meant "rulers of foreign countries," a term that originally only referred to 
the ruling caste of the invaders. This is what the Egyptians called them but what did those invaders call 

The Hyksos called themselves by the Hebrew word "Am" or "people" which is why they were 
called "Aamu" by the Egyptians. But there was another word that they were later called by the Egyptians. 
It is a word which you will soon begin to recognize. This word was "Apiru" which was applied by the 
Egyptians to the Egyptian class of peasant laborers and slaves. [ 215 ] Remember the name, "Apiru", because 
you will see it again. 

One of Manetho's Hyksos kings called himself by the non-Egyptian title, "ank adebu", which 
signifies "Embracer of Countries." Why would someone who had usurped the throne of the pharaoh of 
Egypt call himself by such a far-reaching and grandiose title? Once Egypt was forcefully subjugated, this 
was not an apt title for the pharaoh of the country of Egypt. However, it was an apt title for one of the 
moneylenders from the tamkarum guilds whose financial tendrils embraced all of the countries of the 
ancient Near East. Such a title suggests that he was a representative of a great power which controlled 
more than one conquered kingdom, "embracing them" in the all-encompassing grip of usury and deceit, 
much like a modern banker embraces the governments of the modern world. 

In addition, most of the Hyksos' names were Semitic. Both the leaders and the ordinary shepherds 
had Canannite names which, according to the custom throughout the ancient Near East, contained the 
names of their gods, in this case, Semitic deities such as Anath or Baal. Or they had ordinary Semitic 
names like Sheshi, Maatibra, Ineni and Yaakov-her (that is, "Yakov" or "Jacob"). The Hyksos even named 
one of the towns that they established as the Aamu city of El- Yehudiya, a Hebrew name. 

The actual population of the Hyksos was predominately Canaanite goat-rustlers and Amorite 


sheep-thieves who were led and financed by their relatives, the Amorite moneylenders of Babylonia. They 
were all Semites and they all had only one object in mind, the looting of Egypt. This was followed by 
complete financial and commercial subjugation of all trade and industry within the country as well as the 
monopoly of all trade outside of the country. They were as single-minded in their greed as the modern 
day Hyksos who are presently looting and pillaging the nations of the world from New York, London, 
Hong Kong, Tokyo, Moscow, Tel Aviv and the other financial capitals of the modern world! 

Certainly not all of the Hyksos were simple shepherds. Not only were they armed with the latest, 
the best and the most expensive of weapons - such as the newly introduced horse and chariot with 
spoked wheels, the advanced composite bow and those expensive copper and bronze swords and maces 
and battle axes - but they understood both military strategy and civil administration. Simple shepherds 
would not have had such knowledge, wealth or skills for such a feat. Their raid was not followed by those 
inter- tribal feuds which usually accompanied forcible settlement of a country by Semitic hordes from 
Arabia, all grabbing for whatever loot they could capture. This looting of Egypt was methodical and 
well-organized. After their victory, they did not break up into warring factions, like the early invaders of 
Palestine. The Hyksos must be credited with military and administrative experience, not possible among 
simple shepherds. They garrisoned strategic points, and maintained a standing army like the greatest 
of the kings. They brought with them military and administrative skills of a people who recognized the 
necessity for establishing a strong central government, something that ignorant tribes of wandering goat 
herders could not possibly have done without guidance. Only with advanced planning, financing and 
military strategy could Egypt have been defeated. And this help came from the moneylender guilds of 
Babylonia who organized and led the tribes of Amorite goat rustlers. Then, these Hyksos leaders sat their 
own fat asses down upon the throne of Pharaoh. 

These Hyksos were all Amorites, Canaanites and other assorted Semites from the east of Egypt. 
But none of them were Jews because no Jews yet existed at that time in history. Their chief deity was 
the Egyptian storm and desert god, Seth, whom they identified with the Semitic storm god, Baal. 
From Avaris they ruled most of Lower Egypt and Upper Egypt up to Hermopolis. South to Cusae, and 
briefly even beyond, they ruled through Egyptian vassals. Vassals and front men and Egyptian puppet 
administrators did their dirty work. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Mesopotamia well 
knew how to employ even the kings to do their bidding. But this was the first time that they had actually 
taken a throne for themselves. They lost no time in profiting from their investment. 

After the initial looting and pillaging, and as the country was secured with armed camps and 
fortified cities, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] chose one of their own as pharaoh. Thus began 
the Sixteenth Dynasty of Egypt with a Semitic non-Egyptian as the Pharaoh. It should be enlightening 
to Bible students to know that this 108 year rule of Egypt by the Hyksos was the time when the Old 
Testament stories about Joseph of Egypt took place. When you understand that the pharaoh and Joseph 
were both Hyksos, then you can better understand this part of the Bible. This area of Biblical scholarship 
is covered thoroughly in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon. Though his story was carried out of Egypt 
when the Hyksos were finally defeated, it should be noted that the final form of the story of Joseph in 
Egypt was written in Babylonia nearly a thousand years later. 

During their Hyksos occupation of Egypt, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] began 
using a simplified hieratic Egyptian script in their writing to communicate with the Egyptians. Egyptian 
hieratic script had been used in parallel with the traditional Egyptian hieroglyphs since the most ancient 
times so it was written and read by all educated Egyptians. Gradually, this simplified script began to be 
used as a means of communicating between the Hyksos merchants and their mercenaries in a writing 
system that was suited to their Canaanite language. This is known as a proto-Canaanite alphabet. 

This proto-Canaanite alphabet later developed into the Phoenician alphabet consisting of twenty- 
two letters none of which indicate vowel sounds. The names of the letters of the Phoenician alphabet are 


the same as those used in Hebrew - unsurprising, since Hebrew is a Canaanite language. And the Hebrew 
alphabet is derived from the Phoencian alphabet. This should be remembered in later chapters when the 
relationship is understood between the Semitic Phoenicians, the Semitic Carthaginians, and the Semitic 
Hebrews, all speaking Hebrew and writing in a nearly identical alphabet. 

Because the lineage of the Hebrew alphabet is so easily traced from Egyptian hieratic script and 
then to the Phonecian alphabet and then even later to the Hebrew alphabet, it reveals yet another lie of 
the rabbis. Those lying frauds claim that Hebrew is the original language of both God and of Mankind 
and they claim that God magically created the entire world from "holy" Hebrew letters. This was an easy 
lie for the rabbis to tell when the Old Testament was the only ancient book available to Medieval scholars 
and while the libraries of Mesopotamia and Egypt were still buried under tons of rubble. But in modern 
times, the ancient lies of the rabbis should not be so ingenuously accepted. 

Anyway, the story of Joseph in Egypt took place during the Hyksos occupation. The pharaoh 
and all of the administrators including Joseph were all Hyksos. Joseph was most likely a Hyksos official 
who was in charge of enslaving and looting the Egyptian people. His relatives kept his story alive in their 
genealogies by writing it in proto-Canaanite on papyrus and later on parchment. Joseph's story was later 
re-written by the scribes of Babylon a thousand years later when they assembled the various papyrus and 
parchment scrolls of the Torah for the purposes that you will soon discover. 

For a nation of goat-rustlers living in desert regions away from water and clay, parchment became 
the writing material of choice since it was made out of calfskin, sheepskin or goatskin. Parchment is 
distinct from leather in that parchment is not tanned, but stretched, scraped, and dried under tension, 
creating a stiff white, yellowish or translucent skin. The finer qualities of parchment are called vellum. It 
is very reactive with changes in relative humidity and is not waterproof. Though it tends to rot in damp 
climates, it is quite durable in the desert regions of the Near East. Parchment was used in Egypt as early 
as the 4th dynasty in Egypt before 2750 BC so it was already available for use by the Hyksos. 

With their domination of the Egyptian people and their control of the Nile trade routes, business 
attained an unprecedented importance during Hyksos rule. Under the stimulation of trade, Kush 
emerged as a prominent and flourishing kingdom with close ties to Asia and Egypt but not simply 
because the Hyksos tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] did all of the trading. Kush was an important 
gateway through which goods entered Egypt through the trade routes leading east to the Red Sea as well 
as with the foot paths leading directly into the African interior. So, Kush became important to both the 
Egyptians who were secretly re-building their army as well as to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
who sailed southward to trade along the Nile. Through Kush, the wealth of Africa was carried down the 
Nile to the trade routes of Palestine and beyond. 

The Kush town of Kerma, for example, consisted largely of mud brick houses spread out along 
the river. It was the seat of a court near the third Nile cataract. The houses and accoutrements testify to 
a considerable affluence and taste for luxury goods. But the affluence was not that of Egyptian officials. 
Among the great assortment of clay seal impressions on pots, baskets and various other receptacles 
which have been excavated from the debris of Nubian Kush, the only names which appear on these seal 
impressions are those only of Hyksos officials but not Egyptian names. 

During the greater part of the Hyksos period, the great trade routes were reopened. But all trade 
was monopolized by the Hyksos. Agriculture was promoted as a means for the Egyptian people to pay 
tribute to the Hyksos overlords. Since Egyptian grain was used by the Hyksos to buy the trade goods of 
other countries, the more that the Egyptian farmers could be forced to produce, the more the Hyksos 
could profit. 

But by leaving the Egyptians with enough to eat after their tribute grain had been paid, meant that 
the Egyptians could also keep hidden all of their gold and silver jewelry and precious stones and golden 
statues of the gods buried in the sand and under the floors of Egypt. It may very well be that the story of 


Joseph in Egypt masks the time when the Hyksos purposely took so much grain away from the Egyptians 
as to cause a seven years famine. In this way, they could force the Egyptians to dig up any of the hidden 
treasures that they had buried in order to buy grain from Joseph, the Hyksos grain minister, and from the 
Hyksos Pharaoh. Joseph and the Hyksos Pharaoh could get the hidden gold and silver of the Egyptians 
in exchange for food. And to whom else could the starving Egyptians sell their children other than to the 
international slave traders who were based in Babylonia and who sat on the throne of Pharaoh? 

This is a situation where an overseer of grain production such as Joseph would have been a very 
important official in the Hyksos pharaoh's trade policies. And because the Egyptians were not Semites, 
whatever cruelties were visited upon them in the name of profits, were not ameliorated by any brotherly 
feelings of kindness or mercy. After all, the Semitic leaders of the Hyksos were the cruel tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] of Babylonia. Although modern Jewish archeologists are lying when they 
claim that Hyksos rule was benign and beneficial for the Egyptians, we must listen to what the Egyptians, 
themselves, had to say about those times to get a truer picture of the situation. 

As Manetho, the Egyptian historian, wrote: 

"After the Hyksos had subdued our rulers, they burnt down our cities, and destroyed the temples 
of the gods, and treated the inhabitants most cruelly; killing some and enslaving their wives and their 
children. ... They all along waged war against the Egyptians, and wanted to destroy them to the very 
roots." Again, for those who study the Bible, this vicious Semitic practice of genocide can also be 
recognized in the stories of Joshua. But more about this in Volume Two, The Monsters of Babylon. 

Manetho's reference to a carnival of destruction is confirmed by the inscription of Queen 
Hatshepsut of the Eighteenth Dynasty, who declared: 

"I have restored what was cast down. 

I have built up what was uncompleted 

Since the Asiatics were in Avaris of the north land 

And the vagabonds were among them, 

Destroying buildings while they governed, not knowing Ra." 

But whether you believe the Egyptians, themselves, or the modern Jewish liars, one thing is clear, 
trade and the looting of wealth was the major goal of the Hyksos. 

Egypt had plenty of grain, beer, bricks, flax and hemp, lamp oil from kikki seeds and later from 
olives, hippopotamus and elephant ivory, ostrich feathers and eggs, leopard and lion skins, dates, precious 
stones, artifacts such as sarcophagi and statues, amulets, rings and scarabs, beads made from faience, 
weapons, jewelry, mirrors, linen, fine veils; mats, ox-hides, ropes, lentils, dried fish, papyrus paper, silver 
and (from the Nubian mines and alluvial deposits) large quantities of gold. These trade goods plus the 
over two thousand years of accumulation of gold and precious stones in the temples and tombs of Egypt, 
gave the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] plenty of loot in their rape and exploitation of Egypt. And 
once the Egyptians had been starved for a long enough time, they dug up their buried wealth and gave 
their gold and their children to the Hyksos in exchange for bread. 

But where did all of the wealth of Egypt go? Rather than bulky statues and art objects, it 
traveled most easily melted down into bullion and transferred to their relatives and business partners in 
Babylonia. It did not go to the kings of Mesopotamia since the Hyksos invasion was a private, corporate 
enterprise. It went to the trade guilds and tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] partners doing business 
in those kingdoms. But also, much of this wealth flowed into the coffers of the Semitic moneylender 
guilds of the cities of Canaan such as Sidon, Kadesh, Acre, Byblos, Arwad and Tyre. These were sea ports. 
Once the Hyksos were finally expelled from Egypt, it was to these seaports controlled by their Semitic 
relatives and by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds that many of them fled. Most of the rest 


of the wealth was carried off by the goat-rustlers into the wilderness of Palestine and Sinai. 

Finally, after more than a hundred years, the Egyptians were able to secretly arm themselves 
for rebellion. When, under Pharaohs Seqenenre and Kamose, the Thebans began to rebel, the Hyksos 
pharaoh Auserre Apopi tried unsuccessfully to make an alliance with Kush but it was too late. The Negro 
Kushites had had enough of the Hyksos. Originally, the Negros of Kush had been inveigled to join 
forces with the Hyksos in order to draw the Egyptian armies south into Upper Egypt so that the Hyksos 
invasion could enter from the north. But after more than a hundred years of being swindled out of their 
trade goods by the greedy tamkarum merchants, after being dispossessed of their wealth and property 
with loans-at-interest, and after experiencing the greed of the moneylenders first-hand, rather than join 
forces with the Hyksos, the Negros preferred to join forces with the Egyptians to chase the Hyksos out of 

Originally, the moneylenders had used Secret Fraud #20 on the Negros of Kush: "Champion the 
Minority so that they dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle the Minority out of 
that wealth and power." They had helped the Negros to attack and loot Egypt. But once the moneylenders 
had control of the country, they used the Sumerian Swindle to defraud the Negros of everything. This 
would be a recurring theme throughout history as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] betrayed 
their allies by becoming "friends" with the enemies of their allies. And then, once their allies had been 
destroyed, they would betray their new friends by making alliances with the enemies of their new friends. 
It was a constant pattern of perfidious friendship followed by betrayal that would be a mark of these 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] right up into modern times. You will see this system repeated in 
both Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon, and in Volume III, The Bloodsuckers of Tudah. 

Once again, the Hyksos and their leaders, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] of Babylonia, 
had made themselves the most hated of people. Once the Negroes of Kush understood what lying and 
greedy betrayers the Hyksos merchant-moneylenders were, they joined forces with the Egyptians. 
Large numbers, but not all, of the Nubian bowmen fought the Hyksos under the command of Kamose. 
However, Nubia, in general, still feared Egypt and refused to fight. 

This time, the Egyptians did not have the disadvantage of inferior weapons. When they rebelled 
against the Hyksos, they did so armed with their own chariots and horses, their own composite bows and 
their own bronze maces and arrow heads. But where did they get them? The bronze and copper swords, 
axes and maces they could manufacture themselves by recycling the copper already in their possession 
as well as from the copper deposits that were within reach of their trade routes through Upper Egypt to 
the Red Sea. Of course, because of the vastness of the deserts none of the trade routes except those which 
were guarded by the Hyksos at the Delta could be effectively patrolled. So, the Hyksos patrols were out 
numbered and out flanked in this regard and the Egyptians could smuggle whatever they needed. 

The chariots were of their own manufacture. The Egyptians took the basic design of the Hyksos 
chariot and improved upon it. They moved the axel from the center to the back of the platform for better 
balance, speed and maneuverability. The platform floor, they made out of leather for lightness and less 
work for the horses and as a shock absorber so the archer was more stable. They replaced the Hyksos 
four-spoked wheel with a stronger, six-spoked wheel. And they designed a U-joint between tongue and 
chariot for greater control and less drag for the horses. With archer and driver, this much-improved 
Egyptian chariot could attain speeds of twelve miles per hour. 

The composite bows they could also make for themselves once they had the design secrets. And 
these secrets were obtained both by reverse engineering and buying them from the Babylonian traders 
who sailed from Babylon, around Arabia and into the Red Sea ports on the African Coast. Anything 
that they needed, including horses and the knowledge of horse-breeding, they could buy from one or 
more of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] families of Babylonia and pay for it with Nubian gold. 
Although it took the Egyptians 108 years before they could expel the Hyksos, within those 108 years they 


bought and bred enough horses and traded for and manufactured all of the weapons and chariots that 
they needed. 

When they were armed and ready Thebes rebelled against the Hyksos. The Theban revolt spread 
northward under Pharaoh Kamose, and about 1550 BC Avaris fell to his successor, Ahmose (1550-1525 
BC), founder of the 18th dynasty thereby ending 108 years of Hyksos rule over Egypt. 

Avaris, the stronghold city of the Hyksos located on the east side of the Delta, was heavily 
fortified. The site of the city covered about two square kilometers, plenty of area for the thousands of 
Hyksos who sought refuge there. Modern archeological excavations reveal that it had a Canaanite-style 
temple, Palestinian-type burials, including horse burials, Palestinian types of pottery, and quantities of 
their superior copper weapons. It was a well-developed, international center of trade. Artifacts included 
goods that were produced from all over the Mediterranean world including a temple with Minoan-like 
wall paintings similar to those found on Crete at the Palace of Knossos. 

Pharaoh Ahmose led his army in a water-borne attack. Powerful as the city was, it could not 
withstand a protracted seige. The battering ram had not yet been invented. It would be another 700 
years before the Assyrans would use that instrument against city walls. But because the Hyksos were 
surrounded and trapped, it would be a simple tactic to starve them out and kill them all. But Pharaoh 
Ahmose had all of Egypt plus Kush and Nubia to pacify and did not want to be entangled with a 
prolonged seige in the Delta. To do so, would keep his army laying siege in the north leaving the Negroes 
of Nubia free to pillage Egypt in the south. 

As Manetho wrote, "The shepherds had built a wall surrounding this city, which was large and 
strong, in order to keep all their possessions and plunder in a place of strength. Ahmose attempted to 
take the city by force and by siege with four hundred and eighty thousand men surrounding it. But he 
despaired of taking the place by siege, and concluded a treaty with the Hyksos, that they should leave 
Egypt, and go, without any harm coming to them, wherever they wished. After the conclusion of the 
treaty they left with their families and chattels, not fewer than two hundred and forty thousand people, 
and crossed the desert into Syria." This 240,000 Hyksos is about one-third of the number that was 
claimed in the Book of Exodus as having escaped from Egypt. But whatever the number, they divided 
into four unequal groups and went on their separate ways. 

Thus, the Shepherd Kings of Avaris - these "Aamu", these "Apiru", these "Hyksos" - were able to 
escape Egypt and, according to the terms of the surrender, they were allowed to take all of their loot with 
them. With whatever silver and gold that they could carry away, some of the Hyksos escaped into Moab 
and Sinai, returning to the previous occupations of their forefathers as sheep herders and goat rustlers. 
In the pre-Canaanite writing that they had learned, they recorded some of their desert journeys on 
parchment scrolls along with their genealogies. 

Other of the Hyksos turned southeast toward Arabia and there they wandered about in the 
wilderness of Sinai for forty years with their goats and sheep for company. These, too, recorded on the 
parchment scrolls genealogies and tales of how they had stolen the Egyptian gold and silver and gotten 
away with it. 

A large number of the Hyksos, speaking their Canaanite dialect and writing on parchment with 
their Egyptian-derived, Canaanite alphabet, moved back to the cities of their ancestors, the coastal cities 
and towns in Canaan. There, they used their loot and their family connections to begin the seafaring 
businesses as a people who have become known to us as the Phoenicians. 

The few Hyksos who had been captured in the Delta region were enslaved and kept in bondage 
in Egypt even while those Hyksos who had been besieged at Avaris were allowed to leave. As slaves and 
peasant workers, they were called by the Egyptian name of Apiru . But this name would take on a very 
different meaning later. 

Those tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] who took the desert trade routes through Syria 


or the sea routes around Arabia and thus back to Babylon, took with them collections of papyrus and 
parchment copies from the temple libraries of Egypt. Many of these Egyptian masterpieces had already 
been carried off to Babylonia during the 108 years worth of looting of the country. But before the fall of 
Avaris, both the original as well as copies of the literary treasures of Egypt had already been deposited in 
the private libraries of Babylonia. Besides the wisdom literature of Egypt, these included the records of 
Joseph, the Hyksos minister of the grainery under the Hyksos pharaoh of Egypt. 

One other Egyptian cultural oddity that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] took with 
them was the practice of circumcision. The Egyptian nobility first began using circumcision as a way 
of increasing their sexual promiscuity. With numerous wives and concubines, they spent much of their 
leisure time in sex-play So, the removal of the protecting covering of the head of their penises gave 
them a constant stimulation and an erotic propensity that kept them quite busy in their harems. Since 
much of Egyptian society went about either naked or wearing see-through linens in the hot weather, 
the practice of circumcision became suffused throughout the society and not just restricted to the upper 
classes. So, when the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] took over Egypt, they not only usurped the 
throne of Pharaoh and prayed to the Egyptian gods-in-residence but they absorbed this Egyptian sexual 
perversion as well. Even after they had returned to Babylonia, this private mutilation was restricted 
to those moneylenders who had been members of the Egyptian expedition and was not diffused into 
Mesopotamian society. 

Circumcision suited the sex-fiends among the Babylonian moneylenders quite well. It gave them 
the increased erotic stimulation that they enjoyed with their many male and female slaves. Since it was 
not practiced in Mesopotamia, it provided them with a way to secretly mark themselves as members 
of the same secretive, family-based tamkarum trade guilds who had cooperated in the looting of Egypt 
without the knowledge of the Mesopotamian kings. Circumcision was not like a tattoo or some other 
distinguishing mark that could be used by a spy to infiltrate their trade organizations. It was something 
not readily acceptable to an adult. It was permanent. And it could be kept hidden unless necessary for 
trade guild identification. Circumcision became at first a distinguishing mark of those guild members 
who had lived in Egypt. But as its increase in sexual stimulation became better known among the 
perverts of Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds, it became a distinguishing mark of 
their secret fraternity that separated them from competing guilds. 

Circumcision played no part in the religion of the Sumerians, Babylonians or Assyrians, and the 
practice seems to have been exclusive to the West Semites and the Egyptians. It is interesting, however, 
that a stone model of a phallus, evidently used in some cult, found at Tepe Gawra (near Nineveh) in a 
stratum datable as contemporary with the Proto -literate period, is circumcised. This may be the result of 
early West Semitic influence at Tepe Gawra, and certainly proves that circumcision as a religious practice 
in the ancient Near East long ante-dated Moses or even Abraham. [ 216 ] Thus, circumcision was not 
something new that identified a Jew but it was something far older than Judaism. It was incorporated into 
the Semitic cultures of the Hyksos and their Babylonian merchant-moneylender financiers because it was 
a form of phallus worship that suited the pimps and sex fiends of Babylonia and the goat-rustlers with 
their many wives. 

Once the Hyksos had been allowed to leave, taking with them Egyptian silver and gold ornaments 
and treasures, the Egyptians razed Avaris to the ground. Ahmose led his army south by boat to attack 
and once again subjugate the Nubians. Thus, he completed the conquest and expulsion of the Hyksos 
from the delta region, restored Theban rule over the whole of Egypt and successfully reasserted Egyptian 
power in its formerly subject territories of Nubia. He then reorganized the administration of the country, 
reopened quarries, mines and trade routes and began massive construction projects of a type that had 
not been undertaken since the time of the Middle Kingdom. This building program culminated in the 
construction of the last pyramid built by native Egyptian rulers. Ahmose's reign laid the foundations for 


the New Kingdom, under which Egyptian power reached its peak. His reign is usually dated to about 
1550-1525 BC. But like all dates from ancient times, is not exact and always open to re-calibration from 
new discoveries. 

Even with this new era in Egyptian history, money was not used and the un-Egyptian concept 
of interest-on-a-loan and debt-slavery was still unknown in the New Kingdom. The entire Egyptian 
civilization that has always been and is today a wonder of the world, was developed without the use of 
money. So, even after the Hyksos were chased away, the Egyptians still bartered among one another and 
lived life to please the gods with prayer and humility. The ancient way! 

Even under the Hyksos, the Egyptians did not need money because the Egyptians were forced 
into vassalage where they worked for the invaders and paid tribute in the form of grain and handicrafts. 
All wealth and all business was monopolized by the Semites while the Egyptians were lucky to get their 
daily loaf of bread and beer ration. 

But even with the huge profits from their Egyptian investments, the moneylenders of Babylonia 
had a problem. Vast though their wealth was, they only owned a small portion of the entire world. The 
fortunes that they had accumulated were too easily lost through wars not of their own making and 
through the attrition by business partners taking shares from the total fortune and afterward becoming 
their competitors. Once their Hyksos minions had been scattered, instead of gathering the entire wealth 
of Egypt into their own treasury as they had planned, much of the total fortune had been carried off into 
the wilderness. Some of it had been safely carried back to the investors in Babylonia, but most of it was 
carted off to the Canaanite cities and used by competing tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds to 
finance the Phoenician empire. Though the moneylenders of Ur and Babylon had made vast fortunes, 
they had seen equally great fortunes slip from their grasping fingers. 

Now that the bands of Hyksos goat rustlers had been scattered into the deserts, now that the 
troops of mercenaries had been disbanded and had returned to their Canaanite towns, now that the 
leaders of this rabble had moved their wealth to the coastal cities and hilly country of Canaan, now that 
everybody had taken what they could carry away from Egypt and had set up their own domiciles and 
petty kingdoms, what was left for the Babylonian moneylenders? True, they had gained huge fortunes but 
in their limitless greed and demonic cunning, they had also seen huge fortunes go to others, fortunes that 
they considered their own rightful due. 

While it has been said that the Semitic nations - Amorite, Hebrew, and Arab - never invented 
anything and that they assimilated all the elements of their cultures from other people, this is not entirely 
true. The clever skills of money manipulation and the enslavement of Mankind through the power of 
money and deceit, was a fine art and science that had a wholly Semitic source even though it was based 
upon the non-Semitic Sumerian Swindle. 

Though their skills at secrecy and subterfuge were great, the moneylenders of Babylon and Ur had 
found a flaw in their schemes. They knew how to enslave Mankind through usury and finance; they knew 
how to use their swindled wealth as a lever for blackmailing kings and administrators; they knew how to 
use wine and women and homosexual filth and gambling for debauching the virtuous and cheating the 
people; they knew how to remain safely in the background while pulling the money-levers that controlled 
society; they knew all of these things. But instead of a steady rise in their fortunes, they had time and 
again seen their careful planning dashed to pieces through no fault of their own. Enemy kings fighting 
wars for supremacy and the competiton from opposing tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] guilds 
had time and again destroyed their fortunes and their properties. The patriarchs of the tamkarum guilds 
could see the impediments to their fortunes, but finding a solution to those problems was difficult. 

In addition, even the members of their own families had divided loyalties through their devotion 
to a variety of gods. Sons and daughters and other close relatives of their extended business families, 
who should have been working for the enrichment of the entire tamkarum family and guild, often gave 


away their share of the fortune to the temples of Marduk or Sin or Nabu or Ishtar . Thus, the wealth of the 
merchant-moneylenders was often diverted and siphoned away to the temples and to the priesthoods. 
In fits of religious piety, trusted relatives and business partners, whose eyes were upon the eternal 
gods rather than upon the infernal accounting books, gave away fortunes to the temples, fortunes that 
diminished the total family wealth. 

Because of this loop-hole in their schemes, much of the wealth of the tamkarum guilds of 
Babylonia had been diverted into the private fortunes of selfish relatives and business associates or given 
away to the temples, never to return. The leverage of great wealth and the industrial economy of scale had 
there-by been dissipated, creating a weakness in comparison with the other tamkarum guilds, guilds that 
would ruthlessly and instantly capitalize on any financial weakness. The moneylenders' total corporate 
power was diminished simply because greedy partners and stupid relatives had cashed out and had 
taken their cash with them, thereby reducing the total buying power of the family and the guild. Such 
relatives as these drained away finances and made a large and successful guild into a less powerful and a 
poorer one. Such relatives and partners as these broke two of the Secret Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle. 
Secret Fraud #8, "Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; international 
crime families are the most successful of all." And Secret Fraud #9, "Only the most ruthless and greedy 
moneylenders survive; only the most corrupt bankers triumph." To end such losses of treasure, the 
moneylenders needed to devise a plan that would keep their numerous relatives and their business 
partners loyal to them more than they were loyal to the gods. 

In addition, there was the ever-present threat of the confiscation of their treasures by the kings. 
How could the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] keep their bullion out of the hands of the kings and 
safely hoarded in their own private treasuries? 

The Sumerian Swindle gave the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] the wealth of the entire 
world for free. What the scheming moneylenders of Babylonia needed, was to figure out a system where 
they could gain wealth and permanently keep everything for themselves without the kings making any 
claims or their relatives giving everything away. They needed a system where they could own more than 
just a single country, a system where they could own the entire world and all of the people in it. They 
could not do it alone because owning the entire world requires willing help and obedient servants. As 
experienced master criminals with the limitless riches that the Sumerian Swindle had provided them, 
they knew that they could only trust relatives and guild brothers. The question was, how could they 
keep their relatives and their guild brothers loyal to their own secret ambitions without actually telling 
the secret? How could the moneylenders prevent their relatives in their devotion to the gods from 
abscounding with both wealth and loyalty? 

But above all, how could they keep the profits of their swindles away from the eyes of the People 
and out of the hands of the kings? If the People saw how very wealthy the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] were, they would stop paying their debts and demand a refund. If the kings could 
confiscate their wealth at will, then what was the use of hoarding anything? So, they needed to develop 
some other system to make the Sumerian Swindle perfect. 

But for now, let's leave the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] counting their loot 
and scheming their schemes in Babylon and Ur. And let's leave the Hyksos waiting for us in the coastal 
towns and hill country of ancient Palestine of 1520 BC. Pharaoh Ahmose had allowed the Hyksos to 
escape from Egypt along with all of their loot as a means of getting rid of them. He wanted to save 
time and to avoid more bloodshed that would have inevitably resulted if the siege of Avaris had been 
prolonged. So, we shall leave those Hyksos scuttling around Canaan and turn back the clock by about 75 
years to where we left Babylonia in 1595 BC at the very beginning of its fall from glory. The Kassites had 
rushed in to fill the vacuum left by the conquering and quickly withdrawing Hittites while directly to the 
north of Babylon on the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, was the kingdom of Assyria, the next great empire. 


Chapter 7 
The Assyrians and the Goat Rustlers 

Before studying the Assyrians, we should again consider the international influence that was 
suffusing the entire ancient Near East. This influence upon all of these societies was felt by the Hittites, 
Hurrians, Mycenaeans, Mittani, Assyrians, and Babylonians as a constant need to fight over loot and to 
force others into paying tribute. 

As you can probably understand by now, the money lending mechanisms of the Sumerian 
Swindle create war. Or more accurately, the moneylenders who practice the Sumerian Swindle create war. 
The reason for this is that while a loan is real - that is, real silver or real grain - the actual interest on the 
loan is a phantom . The interest on a loan is an arithmetical delusion of claiming and believing that more 
can be created out of less. The delusion and the fallacy is that numbers are the same as physical goods and 
by multiplying numbers, you can alchemically create more physical goods. Charging interest-on-a-loan, 
is a form of magical sleight-of-hand, a mere juggling of numbers and account books. But instead of a 
magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat, the moneylender pulls money out of your pocket. 

Just as it does to the modern fool who borrows on their credit cards and borrows from the 
swindling bankers, the numbers all make sense mathematically; one shekel on loan at fifty percent 
interest equals a shekel and a half in return. Yes, that is true for numbers written on a clay tablet or on 
parchment or on papyrus or on a computer printout. The math is all correct and true in its pristine 
intellectual perfection and theory. But the numbers are only true on paper; they are not necessarily true 
in the physical world . Mathematics can be used to describe the physical world just as written words can 
be used to describe the physical world; but neither the numbers nor the words are the physical world. 

No matter the simplicity or the complexity of the problem, the biggest difference between the 
mathematics of the scientists and that of the moneylenders is this. When a scientist's math doesn't 
accurately solve the problem, he honestly tries to find where the errors were made and to correct them. 
But when a moneylender's or a banker's math doesn't solve the problem, he lies and cheats and swindles 
and betrays so that the numbers still create a profit. Business math is, by its very nature, a swindler's 

Juggling the books in science or engineering creates errors because mathematical measurements 
are identically related to physical objects and energies. An error in either the math or the engineering, 
shows up in its complimentary science. That is, both the mathematics and the physics must be correct 
and in harmony; but one of them cannot be correct alone while the other is in error. If either the math or 
the physical entity are not correct, then the scientist tries to find out why and to find out where the error 

But juggling the books in money lending and banking and business has a long tradition because 
interest calculations are inherently felonious. The calculations of interest-on-a-loan create a mathematical 
swindle which is easily proven. But because it also creates a huge profit for its dishonest perpetrators, the 
swindle is also feloniously hidden. Using science and math, the scientists promote truth and precision. 
Using business and math, the businessmen promote deceit and larceny. This is how "it has always been." 

In the physical world, you can calculate the orbit of Neptune's moons and the number of atoms 
in a drop of water and the exact yield of energy from an atomic reaction and the precise stresses on a 
skyscraper's steel beams, but you can never create more of anything by charging interest-on-a-loan . 
That is the clever deceit of the Sumerian Swindle. The moneylenders claim that usury gives a real result 
because they have the arithmetical numbers on paper to "prove" it. But the credit calculations of a banker 


are a delusion . Among all people, the bankers and financiers are liars and swindlers and criminals by 
profession . Their mathematics are no more able to create physical things from interest-on-the-loan than 
Newtonian physics is able to calculate the orbit of an electron around a banker's gruntle. In the physical 
world of real things, it is totally impossible to charge interest-on-a-loan and to get back more than was 
loaned without eventually running out of physical things to get back . 

Yes, you can write an infinite number of calculations on paper proving that charging- interest- 
on-a-loan produces an infinite amount of profits. But this physical world is not infinite. The entire 
planet is finite. There is a limited amount of rock, of ocean, of air, of silver, of gold. So, if you try to apply 
arithmetical calculations that approach infinity to a physical world that is finite, you will fail. It does not 
compute. It is impossible. But because it is a swindle, the bankers insist that it is their "right" to not only 
demand the impossible but also to steal people's property when the People cannot pay the impossible. All 
banking and money lending is a swindle and all bankers are criminals . The only reason these criminals 
have succeeded in betraying the People for so many millennia is because they have conspired with 
secrecy and falseness to protect their swindle from discovery. The People are swindled and betrayed 
because they erroneously assume that the moneylenders are honest businessmen simply because they 
"have always been here." The money lenders have not always been here; nor have they ever, ever been 
honest . 

You can put the entire planet out on loan, but no matter what the numbers claim, there is no way 
that you can get a planet and a third back in profits. You can put the entire wealth of a nation out on loan. 
At the Babylonian rate of 30% interest, it is physically impossible to get back 130% no matter what the 
numbers on the clay tablets say - impossible, that is, unless you cheat . Although anyone can make 130% 
look real in an arithmetical equation by merely multiplying the numbers, try though you may by waving 
a magic wand over a shekel of silver, praying over it, demanding and cajoling it, showing it to your ledger 
book that claims that it should turn itself into a shekel-and-a-third, or beating it with your fists, it is no 
use whatsoever. That shekel of silver cannot grow into a shekel-and-a-third to satisfy the moneylender's 
numbers, unless you can steal someone else's silver . Only by stealing silver from someone else or from 
somewhere else, can the loan numbers be satisfied and the books be balanced. 

Because of the stupendous size of the Swindle, the ancient bankers knew that by charging interest - 
on-loans that over time, eventually, the People would have to give the moneylenders the entire world as 
well as their own lives as debt-slaves. The moneylenders have practiced Secret Fraud #14 for the past five 
thousand years: "Anyone who is allowed to lend-at-interest eventually owns the entire world." 

Once again remember that it was those who could read and write and calculate interest amounts 
who made their profits from the labor and sweat of the common man who was illiterate. So, it was a great 
advantage to the moneylenders to keep the people ignorant. Over the centuries, as the People began to 
understand how they were being defrauded through lending- at- interest, the moneylenders found that 
any such stirrings of dissatisfaction and rebellion and calls for "reform" were most effectively squashed 
using murder, the tyranny of enslavement and the chaos of war. 

If the People could be physically defrauded and enslaved and clapped into irons before they 
realized their danger, then all is well for the moneylenders and bankers. Once the people were enslaved, 
they were powerless to do anything about their losses. And while they were being gradually swindled of 
their goods and freedoms, it was absolutely imperative for the moneylenders to keep the people stirred 
up and in a state of fear and anxiety so that they would not have the opportunity to figure out the real 
cause of their problems. The People would not be thinking about beating and hanging the bankers if they 
were kept running about under a hail of sling stones and flaming arrows. 

Because the money lenders and merchants profit so enormously from their frauds, they had 
the money enough to hire mercenaries, assassins, trouble-makers, rumor-mongers, and seducers to 
make sure that there was always a controlled level of chaos in society. When the People are sufficiently 


worried and stressed from rumors of war and manufactured crises, they don't have the leisure to think of 
anything besides survival. 

But enslaving the entire population was also impossible because that left no one able to pay 
the moneylenders. There had to be a social class of the very wealthy to buy the goods offered by the 
merchant-moneylenders. Slavery had its limits both as a means of collecting on the debt as well as for its 
use in terrorizing the People. As long as Society had enough circulating wealth to buy the debt-slaves, 
the moneylenders could profit from their swindle. But when the interest payments became so high that 
no one could afford to buy anything because all of their money was going to the bankers as debt-service, 
or when the rich were over-supplied with slaves and no one wanted to buy them from the moneylenders' 
slave markets, then the entire Sumerian Swindle became paralyzed. There had to be both poverty- 
stricken slaves and excessively wealthy awilum [Haves], as well as the chaos of war, in order for the 
Swindle to operate smoothly and profitably. 

Through a continuing repetition of inflation and depression cycled back and forth, ad infinitum, 
the moneylenders could obtain all of society's wealth like a snake swallowing its prey. First chewing on 
one side and then on another side, little by little, back and forth, the bankers could swallow the entire 
country into their vaults and ledger books. They could profit from both inflation and depression. And 
so, they promoted first the one and then the other and back again while hiding their profits behind a 
hypocritical sham of "suffering from a downturn in business." 

However, one danger to the moneylenders was (and is) the rise of a middle class. A well-fed 
middle class provides leisure and an opportunity for thinking men to ponder the causes and cures of 
social and political ills. While a middle class provides a storage place for silver diffused throughout 
society during times of prosperity, such a silver- absorbing sponge needed to be squeezed out on a 
regular basis so that the Peoples' hidden hoards and rainy-day savings of silver could once again cascade 
into the bankers' hands. Once the People are given an opportunity to prosper, ruthless application of 
Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian Swindle is the tamkarum 's [merchant-moneylender's] standard tactic: 
"Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for the bankers 
when the people are impoverished." 

A middle class also provides potential competition because the ambitious and the moderately 
wealthy members of the middle class can discover ways to invest their small money to increase their 
wealth. That would also increase the number of businessmen among the wealthy awilum [Haves], 
creating competition resulting in a drop in prices and in profits among the already existing tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] class. But eliminating competition by creating monopolies, had always been 
a top strategy of the moneylenders and merchants. They adhered to Secret Fraud #7: "Monopoly gives 
wealth and power but monopoly of money gives the greatest wealth and power." The moneylenders 
profited most when the very rich ruled over the very poor without the competition from a well-fed and 
educated middle class because the Sumerian Swindle was only successful as long as the People did not 
know that they were being defrauded. Thus, the moneylenders preferred to destroy any middle class so 
that only the "Haves" and the "Have-Nots" existed. 

A middle class is also useful from whom interest can be swindled from loans and to whom 
merchants can sell their goods at a handsome profit. As long as they are dependant upon the 
moneylenders, an indebted middle class is a source of huge profits, as can be seen in modern times. 
But once the wealth of a middle class reached a point of being wealthy enough to be independent from 
the moneylenders, they would have to be destroyed, impoverished and enslaved. No competition from 
outside of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] guilds could be allowed if the moneylenders and 
merchants wanted to maintain their extremely high profits, profits that gave them luxury and power over 

Also, a middle class is only useful to the moneylenders as a market for real estate and other goods 


as long as they buy it on credit . But once they have acquired enough property to pay off their loans 
and to put themselves into the upper classes; and (through their hard work) once they have acquired 
enough cash so as not to require loans from the moneylenders, then they become independent from and 
competitors to the awilum [the Haves] . Once enough of the middle class has paid off their property to 
become property owners rather than mere debtors, then the middle class has to be destroyed. They could 
not be allowed to keep what they had worked so hard for and earned. If the middle class property owners 
could be subjected to emergencies and social stresses, then those property owners who had purchased 
their homes and farms at interest from the moneylenders at a high price, out of desperation would either 
sell back to the moneylenders those same homes and farms at a low price or else lose them in foreclosure. 

Creating poverty for others was the moneylenders' guarantee of maintaining all wealth for 
themselves while crushing the People beneath their feet. This was again Secret Fraud #11 of the Sumerian 
Swindle: "Dispossessing the People brings wealth to the dispossessor, yielding the greatest profit for 
the bankers when the people are impoverished." Not only are the poor easily enslaved but all of their 
property is, out of their extreme desperation, cheaply purchased and easily swindled. 

Throughout Mesopotamian history, slavery and the fear of being enslaved for debts, provided the 
necessary terror to induce debt payments to the bankers by both the rich and the poor. Excessive wealth 
was only necessary among the awilum [the Haves] so that they could buy the debt-slaves and the luxury 
goods imported by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] . Thus, the "Haves" always had their best 
interests served by the merchant-moneylenders since the merchant-moneylenders were members of the 
same awilum [Haves] social class. Even so, the wily merchant-moneylenders always profited the most 
since they were the sellers and the "Haves" were the buyers of all slaves and all imported items. 

So, during the rise of the Assyrian Empire, the Assyrian moneylenders began to expand the 
Sumerian Swindle into its most advanced level of corruption, that is, the banker's swindle known in 
modern times as the "business cycles of boom and bust". We modern people experience it today and 
accept it because "it has always been here." 

Times of plenty and times of dearth could be manipulated by the moneylender guilds simply 
by lending or hoarding silver and lowering or raising interest rates simultaneously across all of 
Mesopotamia . Low- interest and zero-interest loans to the rich created richer awilum [Haves]. Any 
reduced profits were made up by making high-interest loans to the poor. Since there were always more 
muskenum [Have-Nots] than there were awilum [Haves] then the profits were always greater by lending 
at low-interest to the rich who didn't need the money while lending at high-interest to the poor who 
needed money the most. Those who were poor enough and desperate enough, would accept the highest 
loan rates for just a temporary respite from their grinding poverty. Being poor and illiterate meant that 
they could not understand that their thumb print on the wet clay tablet guaranteed that the moneylender 
would have them in slave's shackles at the end of the loan period no matter how hard they worked under 
the hot sun from dawn to dusk. 

In Assyria, times of plenty were arranged so as to increase commerce and thus profits. Prosperity 
always threw the People into euphoric celebrations of their new wealth and freedom from want, causing 
them to over- indulge in happiness and full-stomachs and excess, all of which required loans to support 
their celebrations and land purchases. During such times, business was good for the money lenders. 

Because the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] controlled the price of grain and were 
constantly lowering the cost of labor through foreign immigration, the muskenum [Have-Nots] were kept 
in a constant and desperate state of inescapable poverty. Such poverty enriched the awilum [the Haves] 
since both cheap labor and desperate borrowers were the result. Yes, the moneylenders were wealthy but 
their wealth was built upon the Sumerian Swindle. The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were all 

As Assyria began to throw off its inferior status to Babylonia as well as to the Hittites, the 


scheming tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] simultaneously began to solve their problem of too 
many slaves and not enough buyers. When the total wealth of a country is held by and owed to the 
moneylenders, resulting in not enough silver to pay off the loans, the only way to keep the Swindle 
moving and producing more profits for the moneylenders is to induce the People to steal silver and gold 
from other people and to give it to the moneylenders. In other words, the only alternative to enslaving 
and impoverishing the entire populace was to send that entire populace away to war. Through war, the 
bankers could suck into their closed system of parasitic finance the outside sources of silver and gold 
that would keep the Sumerian Swindle afloat. Since it was impossible to ever have enough silver in the 
country to pay both the principle and the interest on loans, then silver from some other country had to 
be stolen in order to balance the books by injecting real silver into the void left by the fallacious, phantom 
arithmetic of the Sumerian Swindle. 

By calculation, 100% of the wealth of a nation loaned out at 50% interest could only be repaid by 
taking back the original 100% principle from the nation plus the 50% interest from some other nation. 
Through moneylending, the bankers would first rob their own people. And when their own people 
became too impoverished to pay the interest (debt-service), then through warfare the moneylenders 
would force neighboring countries to pay that interest by robbing them of their silver. 

In addition, the Assyrian moneylenders found that war killed off large numbers of land-owners. 
The starving and desperate widows and orphans would sell their farms and properties cheaply. And 
those farms that were vacant and abandoned because the owners had been killed in war could be cheaply 
acquired merely by paying the back taxes on the property. With good farm land bought cheaply, the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] found that they could profit from war by selling these vacant farms 
to foreigners at high prices. Thus, the moneylender became the ultimate parasite who not only sucked the 
health and wealth out of his own people but in the end killed his People and then immigrated in foreign 
victims from other countries so that he could next parasitize them. This is "how it has always been," the 
moneylender is a parasite who sucks the vitality of Society. 

As the wealth of foreign nations was seized as a trophy of war, this injected circulating bullion 
into the moneylenders' international system of fraud. What silver and gold that was not directly paid to 
the moneylenders as debt service remained in circulation among the People as bullion that was spent 
into the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] network of family and guild monopolies such as luxury 
imports, real estate, beer taverns, brothels, gambling hells and slave markets. Through their interlocking 
businesses, the merchant-moneylender guilds cast a wide net that caught all monies circulating in the 
ancient Near East. For the above reasons, with the merchant-moneylenders operating from behind the 
scenes as advisors and spies and financiers of the king, war became the major business of Assyria. 

As we look into the history of Assyria, please understand and remember that because the 
Sumerian Swindle is a deceitful and dishonest scam, it can never be administered by honest men . 
Although they strive to appear to be honest businessmen, banking and moneylending are intrinsically 
dishonest and criminal enterprises. The ones who controlled it in ancient times as well as those who 
control it in modern times, were and are the most evil and the most corrupt creatures in all of society no 
matter how nice they look wearing fancy clothes and while pretending to be honest. How could these 
old devils be anything other than criminals when taking callous advantage of the weak and the poor, 
enslaving entire families, pimping out innocent boys and girls, operating prostitution, alcohol, gambling, 
pawning of goods, smuggling, tax evasion, combined with the beating and murder of those who could 
not pay the larcenous debts and sending off millions of people into the hell of war? How could such 
evil creatures be "honest businessmen"? But this was all part of being a moneylender. This most evil of 
all occupations is the same today as it was then. The bankers and financiers and merchants today are 
nothing but criminals and traitors to all of Mankind just as they "have always been". 

As the long centuries passed, the moneylenders became no different than demons preying upon 


the impoverishment, enslavement, starvation, suffering, illiteracy, war-losses and death of Mankind. 
Basking in the glory of their riches and the high positions granted to them by the deluded and corrupted 
kings, the moneylenders were - as they are today - the actual causes of the death and suffering of billions 
of people. 

Under the pressure of cheap foreign labor, the resulting dislocation of native labor from the 
land gave the moneylenders and kings plenty of foreclosed and starving peasants to fill the ranks of the 
army in exchange for land grants, social status and rations. Like a giant meat grinder, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] shoved the People into their war machine and swindled them out of all that 
they owned. And after the poor immigrant farmers had built a new farm with their hard work, the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] once again dispossessed them of their land because that was "how 
it had always been". So, these peasants, out of desperation, joined the army in order to be given an ilkum 
[military land grant] and some rations because that was the only avenue open to them. 

Then, they would be sent out to fight other countries for loot which they gave to the kings and 
spent with the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] businesses. Of those who died, the kings confiscated 
their property and sold it for back taxes to the moneylenders. It was a smoothly working scam that had 
taken centuries to perfect. And it still works smoothly today. What is consistently good for enriching the 
bankers and the merchants and the moneylenders, has always proven to be very bad for the People. So, 
when you see a banker or financier, know that he has built his wealth upon the impoverishment and the 
destruction of tens of thousands and millions of other people. A banker is a parasite. A financier is a con- 
artist. Both are criminals. 

Passing mention has already been made of the Hittites who attacked Babylon and then retreated, 
leaving the country in Kassite control. With such a powerful army capable of defeating Babylonia, the 
Hittites were certainly a challenge to Assyria. These earliest inhabitants of Asia Minor spoke dialects 
which were not Indo-European. The Indo-European speakers among them began to arrive in the area 
in the first century of the second millennium. Before following the history of the Assyrians, it would be 
good to understand the Hittites and their relationship with Assyria and the entire region. 

The trading arrangements between Asia Minor and Assyria came to an end shortly after 1800 
BC as the Hittites came into prominence and began to take control of the natural resources and trade 
routes within their own territories. Before they asserted themselves in this way, the region's trade had 
been conducted through trading colonies established by other countries. Assyrian tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had a trading colony in Cappadocia that monopolized the bronze trade from the region. 
We find evidence from Hittite documents that in the second half of the second millennium the Hittites 
had trading relations not only with Mesopotamia but also with Egypt and the Mycenaean kingdoms in 
western Asia Minor, Rhodes, and Greece. 

The Hittites produced copper and silver in large quantities. These resources alone gave them 
the buying power and the products that were in demand all over the ancient Near East. So they had the 
resources to build profitable trade relationships. In addition, during part of the second millennium the 
Hittites had a virtual monopoly of iron, still a relatively rare metal. Because of its superior strength and 
durability, iron could be smithed into light weight and extremely sharp swords and daggers that held an 
edge in combat and could cut through the softer copper, bronze and brass weapons. Like any technology 
that gives a military advantage, the production and export of particular metals of military importance, 
such as copper, brass, bronze, tin, and iron, were frequently under state control in every country. As a 
strategic metal, the export of iron was a royal monopoly. With their monopoly of iron, the Hittites had 
a valuable trade commodity as well as a military technology superior to the bronze, copper and brass 
weapons of the surrounding countries. Thus, through their control of strategic metals and their military 
might, the Hittites became a major force in the region. 

As always, a great deal can be understood about a people by inspecting their laws. The Hittites did 


not use the lex talionis, eye-for-an-eye, cruelty of the Semites. An example of the Hittite Laws from about 
1650-1500 BC show that fees were paid for personal injury 

■ "If anyone blinds a free person or knocks out his tooth, they used to pay 40 shekels of silver but 
now they pay 20 shekels of silver. He shall look to his house for it." [ 217 ] 

However, even in Hattiland, the Babylonian and Assyrian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] 
had wormed their way into the graces of the Hittite kings. By claiming a superior social prestige, 
the merchants were especially protected as can seen by the difference in Hittite laws concerning the 
punishments for murder of a citizen versus the murder of a foreign merchant. 

■ "If anyone kills a man or a woman in a quarrel, he shall bring him for burial and shall give four 
persons male or female respectively. He shall look to his house for it." 

■ "If anyone kills a merchant in the foreign land, he shall pay 4,000 shekels of silver. He shall look 
to his house for it. If it is in the land Luwiya or Pala, he shall pay 4,000 shekels of silver and he 
shall replace his goods. If it is in the land of Hatti, he shall also bring the merchant himself for 
burial." [ 218 ] Merchants were, once again, a special class. 

Wages in Hattiland were 12 shekels of silver for a man and 6 shekels of silver for a woman per 
month . Farm work paid 1500 liters of barley for three months , 600 liters for a woman. Compare this to 
the low wages paid to the workers under Hammurabi's first Dynasty of Babylon (1894-1595 BC) which 
established standards for all of Mesopotamia throughout its subsequent history. In Babylonia, farm 
work only paid 1200 liters of grain per year , and only if the worker was a full time employee rather than 
a mere seasonal worker which most of them were. Wages paid in silver in Babylonia were only 4 shekels 
per year. This difference is strictly a reflection of the corrosive influence that the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] had on Babylonia. Using the Sumerian Swindle, they had impoverished everybody in 
their society except for themselves. 

These price differences could also be attributed to the fact that the Hittites had their own silver 
mines so that the metal was more common and so prices reflected a temporary inflation. However, this 
was not the case since wages were also paid in grain rations. And it is these grain wages that reflect the 
values not just of goods but of a higher form of Humanity among the Hittites rather than was found 
among the Mesopotamian Semites. The difference between a generous 1500 liters of grain paid to 
Hittite laborers for three month's work versus the miserly 1200 liters of grain paid to the Babylonian 
and Assyrian laborers for a whole year's work , cannot be a result of inflation but is rather a result of 
fairness between the Hittite "Haves" and "Have-Nots". The Hittites paid their people a fair wage while 
the Mesopotamian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders], specifically, and the Mesopotamian awilum 
[Haves], in general, swindled and robbed their people at every opportunity. 

The Hittites had not been subverted and betrayed by the moneylenders as had the Babylonians 
and Assyrians because Hattiland was ruled by a king for the sake of his people rather than by 
moneylenders for the sake of themselves. Furthermore, because the Hittites were not dominated by the 
materialistic merchants and moneylenders, theft was not considered such a bad thing. The thief merely 
paid a fine of 12 shekels of silver. In addition, the sexual perversions of the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] were abhorred by the Hittites. Unlike the societies of Mesopotamia that were dominated 
by the perverted merchant-moneylenders and the homosexual bankers, in Hattiland sexual relations with 
one's mother, daughter, son or a beast was punished with execution. 

But there were other people besides the Hittites who had contact with Assyria. It is appropriate 
here to refer to the part played by Syria as a middleman in international trade. Located between Assyria 


and the Hittites, Syria was in the Hittite orbit for a time because Northern Syria always formed a terminal 
of one of the main trade routes from Mesopotamia. The Alalakh district was a terminal for trade 
routes from both southern Mesopotamia and Cilicia as early as the fourth millennium. In the second 
millennium, the Amorite city of Alalakh had a checkered career politically, coming under the control 
successively of Egypt, northern Mesopotamia and the Hittites. But this very fact is an indication of its 
commercial importance. [ 219 ] 

Although this city would later be destroyed by the Hittites, it should be noted that one of the 
kings of Alalakh, Idrimi, recorded on his statue in the 15th century BC that he gained his throne by 
winning the support of the " Hapiru people in the land of Canaan". These Hapiru recognized him as the 
"son of their overlord Barattarna" and "gathered around him". After living among them for seven years, 
he led his Hapiru warriors in a successful attack by sea on Alalakh, where he became king. Keep these 
Hapiru tribes in mind since we will be dealing with them again. It is of interest here because of the wide 
range of the Hapiru or Habiru or Apiru or Hebrews outside of Canaan. These Semitic goat-rustlers and 
bandits were widespread throughout the entire region. And it is noteworthy that they were allied with an 
Ammorite Syrian and not with any kings of Canaan. 

Other trade colonies were established in Hittite territory by Mycenaean merchants. There were 
also Assyrian and Egyptian colonists present, to judge by a document listing wine deliveries for people of 
these nationalities. As to values, it is stated in the cuneiform texts that gold was at this time worth three 
or four times its weight in silver. [ 220 ] This low ratio was the result of the huge amounts of gold bullion 
that had been released into circulation from the Hyksos plunder of Egypt. It was still in circulation in the 
markets and hidden in hoards and had not yet fallen completely into the hands of the moneylenders. 

Another large and important group of people were the Hurrians, who were moving southwards 
during the first half of the second millennium BC. Associated with the Hurrians at this time was an 
aristocracy of the race which we know as Indo-European or Aryan. The Aryans derived ultimately from 
the steppes of Russia, one of the original homes of the wild horse. Because of this, the Aryans were 
always found in association with the horse, and it was the Aryan migrants of the second millennium who 
introduced the horse-drawn chariot as an instrument of war. This chariot-owning Aryan aristocracy, 
ruling over a population which was largely Hurrian, had succeeded in establishing a powerful kingdom 
shortly before 1500 BC centered upon the Habur River area. We know this kingdom as Mitanni. [ 221 ] 
Mitanni at its greatest extent stretched from Lake Van to the middle Euphrates and from the Zagros 
Mountains to the Syrian coast. 

The kings of Mitanni bore not Hurrian but Indo-European names, while the old Indian gods 
Mitra, Varuna, Indra and the Nasatiyas were worshipped. In Hurrian documents, particularly those 
concerned with horses and warfare, technical terms occur which have cognate forms in Indo-Aryan. It is 
also significant that unlike all the earlier peoples of the Ancient East, among whom burning of the corpse 
was rare and sometimes regarded as a horror transcending death itself, burning was the proper mode of 
disposal for the bodies of the early Mitannian kings. All this points to the presence of an Aryan warrior 
caste ruling over a largely non- Aryan population. There is some evidence of the same kind pointing to 
the presence of Indo-Aryan elements among the Kassite ruling caste also. [ 222 ] 

The kingdom of Mitanni is, oddly enough, best known not from evidence found in the kingdom 
itself, but from documents discovered in the land of the Hittites, in Syria, and above all in Egypt. These 
documents point to the considerable, if temporary, importance of Mitanni. The sources from Egypt are 
of two kinds. One is the Egyptian hieroglyphic documents, which have references to armed conflict with 
Mitanni in the Syrian region, the area in which the two States came into competition. The other Egyptian 
source, surprisingly, consists of clay tablets inscribed in cuneiform. These tablets are the famous El 
Amarna letters constituting part of the diplomatic archives of the Egyptian Pharaohs at a period around 
1400 BC. These documents include letters to the Pharaoh from various princes of Palestine and Syria, 


from the kings of the Hittite land, Assyria and Babylonia, and from the King of Mitanni. 

The part of the correspondence involving Mitanni clearly shows that at the time Mitanni was 
on an equality with Egypt. These letters show that marriage alliances were made between Mitanni and 
Egypt, and give evidence of several instances in which Mitannian princesses were sent as brides for the 
Pharaoh. (It may be added that the Kassite ruler of Babylonia also made marriage alliances of this kind 
with Egypt). The kingdom of Mitanni was so powerful at this period that its eastern neighbor Assyria was 
completely eclipsed and indeed at one time became actually a vassal of Mitanni. By 1350 BC, however, 
Mitanni, torn by internal dynastic strife, had become so weak that it was virtually a dependency of the 
Hittite ruler Shuppiluliuma. Assyria was now able to reassert its independence, and this period, during 
the reign of Ashur-uballit I (1365-1330 BC), marks the beginning of the emergence of Assyria as one of 
the great Powers of the ancient Near East. [ 223 ] 

The Assyrians of the period 1350-612 BC were one of the most important, as well as one of the 
most maligned, peoples of the ancient world. Situated in northern Mesopotamia on the open plains 
immediately south of the great mountain ranges of Armenia, the people of Assyria had borne the brunt 
of the pressure generated by Indo-European peoples on the move from the steppes of Russia. We have 
already seen that Assyria was for a time actually a vassal of Mitanni, and in the following centuries, up 
to about 1000 BC, it was to be subject to constant pressure from Aramaean peoples in the region to the 
west. The human response to this continual pressure was the development of a sturdy warlike people 
prepared to fight ruthlessly for their existence. [ 224 ] And their Semitic ruthlessness and cruelty is what 
gave them the worst name among all of the other cruel and ruthless peoples of the ancient Near East. 

Assyrian political history from 1350 BC onwards shows a curious rhythm between periods of 
expansion and decline. First came a period of about a century in which Assyria secured itself from the 
threat of domination by Babylonia, and finally settled the Mitannian problem by turning what remained 
of that once powerful kingdom into the westernmost province of Assyria . [ 225 ] The kingdom of Mitanni 
was finally brought to an end when Shalmaneser I (1274-1245 BC) conquered the last king, Shattuara II. 
This conquest is of some sociological interest in that over 14,000 prisoners were deported. This marks an 
early instance of the deportation policy later extensively used by the Assyrian empire. [ 226 ] This "curious 
rhythm between periods of expansion and decline" was the result of the moneylenders systematically 
shifting their silver back and forth between kingdoms while hoarding or lending this same silver to 
whichever kingdoms most favored their profits and had the strongest armies. As long as they could work 
in secret, hiding both the source of their wealth and the wealth, itself, they could manipulate kings and 
entire countries because it was a mystery to the kings as to where the silver came from or where it went. 
Keeping their silver out of the hands of kings, unless it was loaned at interest, meant that the location 
of their bullion had to be secretly shifted from time to time. This was accomplished through the temple 
strong rooms protected by the gods, since the treasuries of the gods were not open to review by the kings. 

Whether looking for commercial advantage or for military intelligence, the use of spies was 
common throughout the ancient Near East. Much of the military and administrative efficiency of the 
Assyrian Empire rested ultimately upon an efficient system of communications and intelligence. An 
Assyrian King, gratefully acknowledging an intelligence report of tribal movements in Babylonia, says: 
"The man who loves the house of his lords, opens the ears of his lords to whatever he sees or hears. It is 
good that you have sent a message and opened my ears." [ 227 ] So, there was always an aura of secrecy and 
alert wariness in everything that the moneylenders did. Spies were everywhere looking for something 
that would earn them a reward from their masters. 

The cartel control that the conspiring moneylender guilds had over the availability of silver, gave 
them the power to determine national and political direction. In the two hundred years since the Hyksos 
had looted Egypt, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had absorbed that looted silver and gold into 
their treasuries, always protected by the temple gods and ready to be loaned-at-interest at any time. But 


to loan it, they had to keep it; and to keep it, they had to hide it. 

A horse is more powerful than a man. But if a man can control the head of the horse, then he can 
make the horse carry him anywhere. In this same manner, a country and its people are mightier than a 
merchant or a moneylender. But if the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] can control the king and his 
ministers, then they can deceive entire countries into following the head that they control. By the time 
Assyria began its rise to Empire starting around 1350 BC, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had 
mastered Secret Fraud #12: "All private individuals who control the public's money supply are swindling 
traitors to both people and country." 

By smuggling silver from rich countries to poor countries, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] could cheaply buy goods, lands and slaves in war-ravaged lands and thereby set up their 
guild members and extended families as monied investors among the poor survivors. The Sumerian 
Swindle provided to the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] such huge profits that they needed the 
man-power and secrecy of their extended families to help them manage their wealth and their properties. 
No man could manage such huge amounts of bullion, thousands of farms and other properties, various 
businesses, and tens of thousands slaves all by himself. But through trusted family members and guild 
brothers, the financial empire of the various tamkarum families could work quietly and profitably behind 
the political storms. One man could only smuggle a few pounds of silver or gold at the most, but a 
hundred or a thousand members of the same guild or extended family or tribe could smuggle gold and 
silver in hundreds of tons without detection. 

Combine the smuggled bullion that the moneylender guilds could move secretly with the temple 
hoards that the priests could move hidden in the base of idols that were carried from temple to temple so 
that the gods could "visit" one another, and you can see how many tons of gold, silver, electrum and gem 
stones could be shifted between kingdoms without the knowledge of the kings. Banking was a big and 
secretive business in ancient times just as it is today. By working secretly in their tribal gangs, the wealth 
of the ancient Near East flowed back and forth between countries at the bottom of grain sacks and in oil 
jars or in hollow planks on the sides of wagons. 

As the silver was shifted away from the rich countries, these rich countries became depressed 
and the resulting financial stress created lower prices which could then be taken advantage of by the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] families. By shifting business and cheap goods back and forth 
between countries, the total wealth of Mesopotamia gravitated into the hands of the moneylenders and 
merchants through the so-called "business cycles of boom and bust". 

Assyria was the first time that the international cartel of moneylenders were able to manipulate 
quantities of silver so as to create national increase and decline as a trade strategy of their guilds and 
thereby to manipulate as a recurring swindle, the prosperity of an entire nation. By 1350 BC, the 
Sumerian Swindle and its related side-businesses along with the huge amounts of looted Egyptian 
bullion gave the moneylender guilds the power to manipulate kings and to finance armies as they shifted 
trade between countries. But it was always the "great king" who got the credit for military expeditions 
which so much benefited the merchants and moneylenders. While the moneylenders stood among the 
crowds waving and cheering the "great king", the crowds were busy looking at the king and not at the 
moneylenders. These voracious parasites were safe just as long as a "great king" was given the glory or 
the blame for wars and the "cycles of boom and bust." Glory and blame cost them nothing. So, they were 
willing for the king to get both glory and blame, just as long as they got the profits from the cycles of 
boom and bust. 

By 1350 BC, the moneylender guilds were able to first gain profits through expanding trade 
and then gain more profits through depressing trade. Since the entire civilized world by that time 
was then practicing trade and commerce with weighed silver and gold as basic standards of value, the 
moneylenders could expand or shrink trade simply by expanding or shrinking the amount of silver 


in circulation by hoarding it and not making any new loans. Not as individual moneylenders but as 
organized and conspiring international moneylender families and guilds could they do this. Secret Fraud 
#8 of the Sumerian Swindle is: "Large crime families are more successful than lone criminals or gangs; 
international crime families are the most successful of all." 

By making cheap loans in unison, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] could cause trade 
to flourish. Of course, trade would flourish anyway without loans. But what a loan did was to allow a 
businessman a large amount of capital so that he could use the economics of scale to make wholesale 
purchases at the moment good deals became available. Although loans were not necessary for business, 
they certainly increased the speed and efficiency (and therefore the profitability) with which business 
could be accomplished. Availability of loans increased the flow of goods. Rather than requiring a 
slow accumulation of capital without being able to borrow, loans saved time by supplying immediate 
capital. As you can see from this system, the moneylender and the merchant are both two elements of 
an interlocking partnership. They made a profit for themselves through their symbiotic collusion, one 
lending the silver at interest and the other selling his imported goods at a profit. At all times, both sought 
a monopoly. 

Not in a single day, but gradually and secretly as they hoarded silver, the economies of entire 
countries could be thrown into depression. And because the silver seemed to just gradually disappear 
of its own, neither kings nor peasants could understand why society slowed down and crashed. As the 
kings paid out the contents of their treasuries, the tamkarum filled their secret hoards from the profits 
of their businesses and income from the Sumerian Swindle. With not enough money to pay government 
employees or the workers who maintained the vital canal system, such depressed economies gave the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] profits as desperate people borrowed against their farms and 
children just to survive. And the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] greater profited through the 
buying up of the cheap lands and cheap goods and cheap personal possessions offered by desperate 
and starving people needing to sell whatever personal property that they had. Thus, the moneylenders 
profited both in good times and in bad times. And they learned how to become the actual cause of both 
good and bad times since planning such events was more profitable than becoming the victim of events. 
The tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] were not just a social class of passive parasites sucking the 
blood of their victims through loans-at-interest but, rather, they were parasitic predators who set traps 
and pushed the unwary to destruction. 

With the inevitable profits from the Sumerian Swindle and their manipulative methods of 
controlling the economies of entire nations, the moneylenders began to see themselves as greater than 
kings. To be successful with their swindles, all they needed was deceit, ruthless greed, and a safe place to 
hoard their silver. The moneylenders of Mesopotamia had all three in abundance, two in their hearts and 
one in the temples under the protection of the gods and the priests. 

But extreme caution was also necessary. As you can see from the mixed history of the region, by 
1350 BC Sumeria and Babylonia were not the racially homogenious countries that they had once been. 
The lands were filling up with and were being surrounded by a variety of different races and tribal groups. 
So, the moneylenders could not always rely upon tribal affiliations or loyalty to city-states upon which to 
trust their business deals. 

The world was being populated by many different peoples and in much greater numbers than 
had been present during the rise of a racially homogeneous Sumeria and the first empires of Sargon 
and Hammurabi. In those earlier days, their empires only had the surrounding tribal confederations to 
contend with. A medium sized army of farmers and thick, mud-brick walls were enough to ward off most 
attacks. Now, kingdoms and empires of the entire ancient Near East were surrounded by other kingdoms 
and empires, all jostling one another for land to live on and trade goods to make their lives easier and 
more prosperous. 


First copper, then bronze, then iron, gave these peoples the military tools to break down the 
thickest city walls and to cut down the bravest of enemies. Iron plows allowed agriculture to extend into 
areas of heavy soil that had previously been impossible to farm. As a result of increased food supplies, 
the world was becoming a more crowded and a more dangerous place for Mankind, not because of the 
physical threats of wild animals or adverse weather, but because of the spiritual poisons of greed and 
covetous grasping. The earth had plenty of resources and food enough for everybody. But those brutally 
greedy people who took more than they needed for themselves, consequently left less than was necessary 
for everybody else. The world was purposely thrown into warfare and chaos because of deceit and greed. 
And most of all, these evil passions burned blackest in the demonic hearts of the moneylenders and 

It was during this period that Assyria first felt the pressure of a new wave of Aramaean peoples, 
called the Akhlamu, moving in from the west. At this time also, there arose in the mountains of Armenia 
a new tribal confederation, known as Urartu (the Biblical Ararat). [ 228 ] 

As king of Assyria, Tukulti-Ninurta I (1244-1208 BC) succeeded his father, Shalmaneser I, and 
won a major victory against the Hittites at the Battle of Nihriya in the first half of his reign. This gave 
Assyria control over the remnants of the former empire of Mitanni. Tukulti-Ninurta I later defeated 
Kashtiliash IV, the Kassite king, and captured the rival city of Babylon to ensure full Assyrian supremacy 
over Mesopotamia. But Assyrian domination was always cruel no matter over which people they ruled. 
Neither the Babylonian people nor the Babylonian moneylender guilds could endure the Assyrians 
for long. After a rebellion in Babylon, Tukulti-Ninuta used that as an excuse to replenish his Assyrian 
treasury. He plundered Babylon's temples. Once again, a king stole from the gods' treasure house where 
the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had their silver and gold on deposit. Did the gods 
not care about or protect the moneylenders' treasure? 

After this expansion into Babylonia, there was a sudden decline in the fortunes of Assyria. This 
was in part a direct consequence of the preceding period of expansion, in that repeated armed conflict 
with peoples to the north, east and south took a serious toll on the cream of Assyrian manpower, just 
as modern wars kill the best and bravest today. However, a more important cause was the disturbed 
condition of the Near East as a whole. There was no longer a kingdom of Mitanni to wield political 
control in the Syrian area. Egypt, which had frequently exercised suzerainty over Palestine and parts of 
Syria, was now in a defensive posture caused by raids from Sea peoples and Libyans and was unable to 
make its influence felt beyond its own boundaries. After their loss to the Assyrians, the Hittite Empire, 
which formerly had given political stability to Asia Minor and northern Syria while protecting the trade 
routes, came under attack by the Sea Peoples migrating from Europe. By 1200 BC, the Hittites were 
powerless and their empire was in ruins. 

But most important of all was the increasing and secret power of the moneylenders. This power 
was secret because the workings of the Sumerian Swindle were secret. An enemy whose attack could be 
seen and defended against was less of a problem than an enemy who secretly stole the money out of your 
country and made all wealth drain away into countless private hiding places. One day there was plenty 
of silver to manage the State and to nourish business and to pay workers; and the next day there was not 
enough silver to pay soldiers or buy swords or repair buildings. It was a recurring problem that was a 
mystery even to the kings. And if the moneylenders were asked where the silver went, they would just 
open their empty palms and shrug their shoulders and whine about how business was so bad that they 
could hardly make a living. Or they would point to a possible cause such as a neighboring country having 
all of the wealth and, thus, giving the kings a pretext for war. 

Once Assyria expanded its borders and seized the wealth of Babylon, thereby creating a 
temporary glut of silver and a boom in the general wealth of the Assyrian people, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] guilds in unison began hoarding their silver into their strong rooms and 


not lending it out. The silver entered through the payments on loans but did not leave. The merchants 
absorbed the silver through sales of goods but did not reinvest in new goods to sell. The tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] guilds had plenty of silver to feed their families and pay their workers, so their 
businesses remained profitable without pause. But nobody else had such large reserves of silver since so 
few people were moneylenders. The effect of this conspiratorial hoarding was to create a silver shortage. 
As the silver began disappearing from circulation, the Assyrian government increased its reliance on 
taxes and tolls for its operating capital. These taxes were collected with typical Assyrian brutality since 
they were so vital to the State. 

From lack of silver, the State pulled back its troops, curtailed spending for civil improvements 
and generally went into an economic recession. This "recession" was carefully crafted to be easily escaped 
through the simple expedient of going to war financed by loans from the moneylenders. But whether 
Assyria went to war or remained within its own borders, the entire civilization of Mesopotamia had by 
that time developed a commercial system based on silver which was controlled by the private tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylender] guilds. The ones who had the silver, had the power to arrange events for their 
own profit. The ones who had the silver became a secret power that was not based upon the divine duty 
of king's or the holy duty of priests to protect the people. They became a secret power based upon the 
ownership of property and the hoarding of silver, all of which was stolen from the People through the 
Secrets Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle. The tamkarum were a secret cabal of criminals posing as honest 
merchants and moneylenders. 

The disturbed situation throughout much of the Near East around 1200 BC, left the trade routes 
insecure and the villages depopulated. This was mainly the result of a southward movement of the Sea 
Peoples from Europe, of which the Greeks and the Biblical Philistines were a part. 

It was these Sea Peoples who ultimately destroyed the Hittite Empire, broke up Egyptian 
authority in Syria and Palestine, and seriously weakened Egypt herself by a direct attempt at invasion, 
which was beaten off by a great sea battle in about 1 190 BC. In these circumstances Assyrian trade 
with the Mediterranean region and Asia Minor was disastrously affected, so that Assyria was unable 
to obtain adequate supplies of such basic materials as metals, for which Asia Minor was still one of the 
chief sources. For a short period Assyria fell under the suzerainty of Babylonia, which by reason of its 
geographical position was largely screened from the troubles caused by the Sea Peoples invasion in Asia 
Minor and Syria and along the Mediterranean coast. [ 229 ] 

But protected as it was by its geographical distance from the Sea Peoples invasions, Babylonia did 
not altogether escape the effects of this general dislocation and mass migrations throughout the Near 
East. Because the Assyrian king Tukulti-Ninurta (1244-1208 BC) had plundered their bullion from the 
temples of Babylon, the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] moved their secret hoards to 
safety in Elam. The Babylonian moneylender guilds had found the corruptible kings of Elam to be more 
useful in ridding themselves of any restrictions upon their criminality. The Elamite temples were strongly 
built and the Elamite king was greedy for bribes. Between the thieving and violent Assyrian kings and 
the good Kassite kings of Babylonia, the moneylenders wanted more power and profits without being 
murdered by the Assyrians or restricted in their own thievery by Hammurabi's Laws that the Kassites 
were enforcing. 

Under king Shutruk-Nakhkhunte, who was king of Elam between about 1185 to 1155 BC, Elam 
amassed an empire that included most of Mesopotamia and western Iran with its capital at Susa. Under 
his command, Elam defeated the Kassites and established the first Elamite Empire. During his reign, the 
Law Stele of Hammurabi was hauled off to Susa as a trophy of war where it remained. Three thousand 
years later, it was discovered there by French archeologists in the winter of 1901-1902 AD and was 
carried off to the Louvre Museum in Paris as a trophy of archeology. [ 230 ] 

It is less important that Hammurabi's Law Stele was carried to Susa, than what the Elamites did 


with his Laws. What the power of the moneylenders was during the days of Hammurabi and how his 
laws (much to their chagrin) had curtailed their power, has already been covered. It is interesting to note, 
however, what the Elamites did with that Code of Laws. They chiseled out some of them. 

Modern archeologists have been able to fill in the chiseled blanks on the Stele from a variety of 
other copies found throughout Mesopotamia. So, we know what had been there. Interestingly enough, 
the laws that the Elamites erased from the stele were the laws that put the most restraints upon the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. The Elamites chiseled out the laws numbered 65 through 100 
which were written to protect the People from the moneylenders and merchants. Thus, it is obvious who 
it was who financed and controlled the Elamite Empire. 

Under Elamite rule, the moneylenders were once again allowed to buy feudal estates from the 
fief owners. They were allowed to swindle people out of their rented houses by charging them rent for a 
year in advance and then kicking them out whenever they wanted to rent to somebody else at a higher 
rate. The moneylenders were not restricted in what they could charge in interest because Hammurabi's 
20% interest maximum cap was erased from the stele. Under the Elamites, they could charge for a loan 
whatever interest they could get away with. Secret Fraud #4 of the Sumerian Swindle was reinstated: 
"Loans of silver repaid with goods and not with silver, forfeit the collateral." Erasing this Law meant 
that the People could no longer pay back a loan of silver with grain or goods of equal value but had to 
pay back the loan only with silver or else lose their property. Hammurabi's Laws had lost the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] millions of shekels in profits, property and slaves. But with the Elamites as 
rulers of Babylonia, the tamkarum had an unrestricted acquiescence for grand larceny. 

Thus, the Sumerian Swindle had no restraints in the Elamite Empire. The merchants were allowed 
to charge compound interest and to swindle the farmers by not writing down their payments with the 
updated sums in a new contract. The merchants were allowed to switch the weights so that they could 
buy from the People with a heavy weight and sell to the People with a light weight on the balance beam. 
The merchants were allowed to make whatever deals that they wanted with their agents and peddlers. 
They were no longer restricted to a 50-50 share of the profits but were allowed to make whatever 
unfair deals that they could. [ 231 ] And so, it is easy to see who controlled the Empire of the Elamites, the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] controlled Elam and the areas to the east in Persia. The Elamite 
Empire was financed by the tamkarum guilds of Babylonia. 

Although the moneylenders of Babylonia had allied themselves with the king of Elam, their 
Elamite Empire proved to be very short-lived. Whether they accepted the bribes of the moneylenders or 
not, kings were always a power not easily controlled. While Assyria was occupied with its own troubles 
in the north and west, Nebuchadnezzar I (1124-1103 BC) of Babylon conquered Elam around 1120 BC, 
bringing that empire to an end and extending Babylonian control over the mountain regions to the east 
and northeast. [ 232 ] Once again, the moneylender's treasures on deposit in the temples of Elam were 
seized by a king. But as long as there remained a "remnant"; that is, as long as there remained even one 
moneylender with silver to loan, they could use the Sumerian Swindle to regain their lost wealth. 

And one way to gain wealth was to sell some of their foreclosed properties. So, the Kassite 
tamkarum began selling the lands in the south to some new immigrates called Chaldeans. But the 
Chaldeans were not fools. They could clearly see the advantages for themselves to occupy the land and 
the disadvantages to the Babylonian and Kassite farmers. So, their natural suspicions prompted them to 
ask, "Why are you selling the land to us? Are you not betraying your own people by doing this?" 

But the wily merchants and moneylenders, expert salesmen that they were, always had a ready 
answer to overcome such an objection. "What are those people to us?" they replied. "They are not our 
friends because they hate us and wish to do us harm. We have loaned them silver and helped them to buy 
land and purchase property. As mighty Sin is our witness, we have done everything that we can to help 
them buy the best farms and the finest orchards. But still they hate us for our goodness and generosity 


because they are full of hatred. But you are our friends, so we will give our friends a good deal in buying 
the land." 

And so, the bargain was made. The Chaldeans had no reason to hate the Kassite moneylenders, 
yet. So, they accepted the offers of cheap land. And to prove their friendship and generosity to the new 
immigrants, those Chaldeans who could not afford the full price, the tamkarum let them buy on time 
at low interest rates. Like blood-sucking fleas, the Kassite moneylenders jumped from their old victims 
who hated them onto their new victims who innocently accepted the moneylenders as their friends and 
guides and mentors. The ancient snake, once again with soft words and low interest rates, coiled around 
its prey It's bite would come later. 

The establishment of stable conditions in Babylonia and the securing of the trade routes from 
farther east had a cumulative effect on the whole of Mesopotamia, and the end of the twelfth century 
marks the beginning of a new period of Assyrian expansion under Ashur-resh-ishi (1133-1116 BC) and 
his son Tiglath-Pileser I (1115-1077 BC). The former threw off the political suzerainty of Babylonia, and 
took the offensive both against the Akhlamu to the west and the mountain tribes to the east, thus giving 
security over a considerably greater area and the possibility of economic prosperity. 

Tiglath-Pileser had to deal with the direct threat resulting from the southward movement of the 
Sea Peoples. This occurred when a large body of Mushku (the people known in the Old Testament as 
Meshech and in Greek literature as the Phrygians) moved into the Assyrian province of Kummukh in 
South Asia Minor. Tiglath-Pileser penetrated into Asia Minor to drive off these invaders and thereby 
ensured Assyrian security in the north-west. With his northern flank secured, he was now able to 
conduct an expedition to the coast of Syria, where he received tribute and trade agreements with the 
Phoenician cities for timber and other commodities. Tiglath-Pileser also made diplomatic contact with 
the Pharaoh of Egypt, from whom he received a live crocodile as a gesture of good will. The increased 
material prosperity resulting from Tiglath-Pileser s success in opening and maintaining the trade routes 
across western Asia is reflected in a considerable amount of building activity for the temples of Assyria. 
[ 233 ] Repairing and enriching the temples appeased the gods, satisfied the priests, gave prestige to the city, 
provided work for the People, and all while protecting the temple treasury where the Assyrian tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] kept much of their loot. 

Trade always produced not only wealth for the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] families 
but wealth through taxes and import duties for the kings. Dredging the canals and rivers, improving 
the quays and rebuilding the temples was the inevitable result of both a commercial investment and a 
religious duty. And the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] profited from all of this, especially when it 
was paid for by others. 

The precise relations between Assyria and Babylonia during the reign of Tiglath-pileser was 
ambivalent. There were raids in both directions and the Assyrians may have gained some border territory. 
But there is no indication that Tiglath-pileser ever attempted to conquer Babylonia. There would, indeed, 
have been little or no advantage to Assyria in so doing. All the principal trade routes of Western Asia 
were in Assyrian hands and trade flowed uninterrupted from the Phoenician sea-coast and the ports 
of north Syria to Babylonia with great profits to Assyria as the middleman. But the Aramaean pressure 
already so evident intensified after the reign of Tiglath-pileser so that his successors inherited national 
decline and disaster. [ 234 ] 

Soon after the death of Tiglath-Pileser in 1077 BC, the pendulum swung once again. A long 
period of difficulty and stress followed a time of relative prosperity. The main cause of the setback on 
this occasion was the growing pressure of these promiscuous and ever-growing populations of Semitic 
Aramaean tribes and kingdoms. Once again, after taking careful accounting of the relative wealth and 
strengths of each side based upon their business knowledge and their merchant-spies, the tamkarum 
[merchant-moneylenders] found it to their benefit to offer easy assistance to the invaders and subverters 


of the country. 

Hiring cheap labor and selling foreclosed properties had become a traditional way of enriching 
themselves and a subversive way of bringing foreign people and foreign power into the region. Any 
country filled with foreigners, becomes easy to over-throw when attacked because these foreigners 
were not only outside the walls with a massed army but also inside the walls as a fifth column posing 
as laborers and small land-owners. These immigrants behind the walls would rise up in revolt as their 
compatriots attacked from the borders. The victors were only too happy to guarantee the wealth and the 
property of their merchant-moneylender "friends" and to promote these same moneylenders to positions 
of influence in the new government in appreciation for their help in betraying their people. 

By encouraging foreigners to immigrate and possess the country the moneylenders replaced 
old and grumbling debt-slaves with new and energetic ones. Since the new debt-slaves were more easily 
swindled, the moneylenders were enriched more quickly. And they could hide their treachery behind 
nothing more than making loans-at-interest "just like it has always been." The enemies that they had 
made from among their own People were pushed aside and dispossessed of all wealth and power by 
the new immigrants who were only too happy to protect their "friends", the moneylenders, from the 
grumbling "bigots" who hated them. 

These grumbling "bigots" were always the Majority of the population who despised the 
moneylenders for defrauding them and who resented the immigrants for dispossessing them. So, the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] practiced Secret Fraud #20, "Champion the Minority so that they 
dispossess the Majority of their wealth and power, then swindle the Minority out of that wealth and 
power." In this way, they would find allies from among the Minority Groups no matter who these groups 
were or what they represented. The moneylenders tended to always pretend sympathy and camaraderie 
toward Minority Groups of every description as a means of using them to destroy the Majority. Whatever 
wealth and property that the moneylenders allowed the Minorities to acquire, could always be tricked 
away from them later through the Secret Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle. 

This time, however, the Semites to the north of Babylonia were not a minority. Semites were the 
majority of the population of both Assyria and Babylonia. But because of the residual mixed population 
of Sumerians, Sealanders and Kassites, their presence affected Babylonia even more than Assyria. 
Ultimately, an Aramaean prince, Adadapal-iddinam (1067-1046 BC), was able to usurp the throne of 
Babylonia. The Assyrian ruler of the time, Ashur-bel-kala (1074-1057 BC), was not willing to assist the 
legitimate Babylonian ruler but instead recognized the usurper and made a marriage alliance with him. 
[ 235 ] And behind all changes in dynasties and kings, regardless of either racial color or city-state loyalties, 
were the moneylenders asking their eternal question: "How can we tamkarum profit from this?" The 
color and politics of silver was everywhere the same. 

The pressure of the Aramaean racial movement had passed its peak by 1000 BC, and during the 
following century Assyria made a slow recovery. This became marked during the reign of Adad-nirari II 
(911-891 BC). Under him, Assyria effected a military expansion. He was able to safeguard his boundaries 
to south and east, and to protect the trade routes to the west by establishing fortified posts along the 
Middle Euphrates and in the Habur region. The security achieved by Adad-nirari Us policy is reflected in 
economic well-being, and in one inscription this King writes: 

"I built administrative buildings throughout my land. I installed plows throughout the breadth of 
my land. I increased grain stores over those of former times.... I increased the number of horses 
broken to the yoke...." 

As always, river trade was of prime importance and is reflected in the rebuilding of the quay wall 
of the capital of Ashur on the Tigris. Agriculture flourished. [ 236 ] Tribute flowed in from vassals in the 


form of chariots, grain, horses, golden vessels, cattle and sheep, wine and food in general. The increased 
wealth was applied to the economic development of Assyria. It was also Adad-nirari who imported 
Bactrian camels for the first time into Assyria and bred them in herds. 

For the next sixty years Assyrian kings followed a consistent policy of consolidating the work of 
Adad-nirari. The security of central Assyria demanded the control and conquest of the hill peoples to 
the north and east and also control of the trade routes into Cappadocia and to the Mediterranean. [ 237 ] 
No matter how great the empires of Assyria or Babylonia became, they were always dependant upon the 
trade routes for all supplies except for grain, water, mud and sunshine. 

In Palestine, the Semitic Hebrew tribes crystallized at this time into the two kingdoms of Israel 
and Tudah. Moreover, since the turn of the millennium, Aramaean influence had been penetrating 
Babylonia ever more strongly, both in the social institutions and in the language. In the former, by 
emphasizing tribal organization, it had tended to weaken the basis of the old city-state system much 
like a Mafia family system weakens a modern city. The Semitic social groups were dependant upon their 
patriarchal tribal genealogies even within a city. This tribal unity suited the secretive moneylenders 
quite well. Since there was such an emphasis on "members" and "non-members" of every tribal group, 
the members could remain related to one another even as they joined various city governments and 
infiltrated other tamkarum guilds. Also, the Semitic Aramaic language had the advantage of being the 
native tongue of a much more widely spread ethnic group than was the Semitic Akkadian used in Assyria 
and Babylonia. For writing purposes the alphabetic script of Aramaic with its twenty-two letters was 
a far easier vehicle of communication than cuneiform writing with its over six hundred signs. So, the 
numbers of scribes and businessmen who could write Aramaic increased more quickly than the scribes 
of Babylonia and Assyria who required ten years to become proficient in the written Akkadian language. 

While Akkadian cuneiform written on clay tablets was still the means normally employed 
for drawing up legal documents, Aramaic writing was sometimes used as a more convenient way of 
endorsing such tablets for filing purposes. Only the learned could, after many years study, ever master 
the use of Akkadian cuneiform; and it was among the learned that cuneiform writing remained in use 
for scholarly and esoteric purposes for some centuries more. By 140 BC, cuneiform had completely 
disappeared except among a few priests who employed it for religious purposes for another half century, 
and among astronomers. For astronomical texts, cuneiform continued in use right down to the time of 
Christ. [ 238 ] 

And yet, even with the racial changes and the tribal changes across the millennia, to the very end 
of the period with which we have to deal, Babylonian civilization retained a Sumerian framework and 
many points of detail characteristic of the earliest times. [ 239 ] Especially was this true of its most carefully 
guarded secret, the Sumerian Swindle. Only the moneylenders understood it for what it was and they 
were very careful to keep it for themselves alone. As swindlers, pimps, betrayers, frauds, perverts and 
war-mongers without a shred of decency, they used every moral and immoral stratagem for retaining 
control of the swindled wealth and the enslaved victims whom they considered to be rightfully their own 

Along the Euphrates, the presence of these many small and often mutually hostile tribes must 
initially have imposed considerable hardship upon the Assyrians in that there was no power able to keep 
open the trade routes upon which the Assyrian way of life depended. Again, remember, Mesopotamia 
had an abundance of food, more food than anywhere else in the ancient world, but nothing in the way 
of natural resources. The vast deposits of petroleum beneath the land were of no use to these ancient 
peoples except where it oozed to the surface as a source of bitumin for sealing their boats and water- 
proofing their building foundations. Mud, water and sunshine was all that they had in abundance. Other 
than grain, vegetables, livestock and mud bricks, these people had to import and trade for everything else 
that they needed or wanted. So, maintenance of the trade routes and canals was vitally important to the 


very existence of every Mesopotamian city-state and dynasty 

In Babylonia, Semitic tribesmen had been able to pass through the lands between the great 
cities and settle on the eastern bank of the Tigris, while the southern marsh area, the "Sealands", was 
occupied by the Kaldu, a people related to the Aramaeans. These both were in a position to interfere with 
sea-borne trade up the Persian Gulf. But with the gradual settlement of these Aramaean tribes, their 
consolidation into settled states and their recognition of the connection between their own prosperity 
and unhindered international traffic, trade continued to flow across the land. [ 240 ] Trade continued 
without interruption by these tribes because their "friends," the Babylonian tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders], desired such trade. The new immigrants didn't want to interfere with the business of 
their "friends" because the Babylonian moneylenders had been so generous in selling them the land. 

It is appropriate at this point to say a word about the organization of the Assyrian army. The 
religious theory was consciously held by everyone that the land and its population were the property of 
the tribal god. Acting through his representative the king, every able bodied man might be called upon 
to bear arms if the national god proclaimed war. No other "reason" needed to be given other than that 
they must fight and kill and die because the god had decreed it. This decision was usually based upon the 
chief priest divining the liver of a sheep, accompanied by smoky holocausts of the carcass and solemn 
ceremonies designed to impress the superstitious onlookers. 

During the Fixing of Destinies at the New Year Feast celebrations, every year the People were 
told whether their god wanted them to be at peace or to go to war. The priests determined this by how 
they "read" the signs on the sacrificial sheep's liver. These same priests also kept the account books that 
recorded how much bullion was on deposit in their temple treasury. These same priests were exempt 
from military service as were the merchant-moneylenders whose gold and silver rested in the temple 
treasury. In practice, many of the wealthier citizens could buy exemption from bearing arms. 

In addition to the national militia there was a small standing army with an elite corps at its 
center, shock troops, royal guards, and young noblemen who had the privilege of running beside the 
king's chariot. Obligation to supply militiamen was not confined to Assyria proper but extended to the 
provinces, and such troops must, for obvious reasons of language and camaraderie, have been organized 
largely according to nationality. The main Assyrian army, on the other hand, was organized in a more 
specialized manner, in units of chariotry cavalry, archers, shock troops, engineers, and what would 
correspond in modern times to service corps. Recent estimates of the size of an Assyrian army in the field 
have been in the range of one to two hundred thousand. [ 241 ] 

Adad-nirari lis successors (Tukulti-Ninurta II, 890-884 BC; Ashur-nasir-pal II, 883-859 BC; and 
Shalmaneser III, 858-824 BC) successfully continued the policy of military and economic expansion. 
Through warfare, as a means of balancing the Assyrian moneylenders' books with stolen silver and to 
guarantee the Assyrian merchants' monopoly of trade, these kings gradually extended the area controlled 
by Assyria until the whole region from the Mediterranean coast to the Zagros Mountains and from 
Cilicia to Babylonia was either directly administered by Assyria or ruled by vassals accepting Assyrian 
overlordship. All the trade routes of the Near East, except those of Palestine, thus came into Assyrian 
hands. [ 242 ] Armies and people require food above all. So, Tukulti-Ninurta continued the policy of Adad- 
nirari, assisting agricultural development and grain production by irrigation and forced re-settlement 
of populations. [ 243 ] Assyrian warfare always made use of terrorism, the crudest tortures, and the most 
punishing techniques that could be devised. Everybody hated and feared the Assyrian army. So, the 
Assyrians spread as much arson, torture, death, destruction and fear as they could before, during and 
after their attacks. 

At the beginning of Ashur-nasir-pal's reign (883-859 BC), the vassal states occupying the 
tributaries along the Habur and upper Euphrates Rivers, began to rebel. The high taxes demanded by the 
Assyrians were irksome. So, the Aramaean leaders thought that the time was ripe to take the country for 


themselves. In the city of Suru, a puppet king from Bit-Adini had been installed as king. But prompt and 
vigorous action by Ashur-nasir-pal secured the submission of the insurgents and the capture and torture 
of the pretender. The list of loot removed from the palace and temples of the defeated city gives some idea 
of the wealth of the riverine Aramaean states. In addition to the usual items of cattle and sheep, silver and 
gold, the list mentions vessels of bronze, iron and lead, precious stones, unguents, textiles of wool and 
linen, and cedar and other aromatic timbers. The rebel leaders suffered death in the usual cruel Assyrian 
way by impaling, flaying alive or by immurement in a wall, and these severe measures secured peace for 
the area for five years. [ 244 ] 

Terror, torture and cruelty was a major military tactic and strategy of the Assyrians and was a 
major reason why the peoples of the entire ancient Near East hated them. But this use of terrorism as a 
State strategy was a lesson that the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] appreciated because it was so 
much in line with their own policy of severity toward non-paying debtors. Protecting their pampered 
persons and ruthlessness in collecting debts and enslaving debtors made for a self-centered and severe 
business personality. The moneylenders had practiced terror, beatings, bullying, confiscations and 
enslavement for over two thousand years, so they valued the uses of terrorism to get what they wanted. 
The Machiavellian principle that "If you cannot be loved, then you should be feared," became a strategy of 
the moneylenders two thousand years before Machiavelli was born. 

An example of the cruel Assyrian mindset of the Semites can be found by reading some of the 
Assyrian civil laws from 1076 BC. Cruel though they were, the Assyrians were as religious and god- 
fearing as any of the other peoples of the ancient Near East, relying on their priests and messages from 
the gods as received through divination. 

■ "If a woman, either a man's wife or a man's daughter, should enter into a temple and steal 
something from the sanctuary in the temple and either it is discovered in her possession or they 
prove the charges against her and find her guilty, they shall perform a divination. They shall 
inquire of the deity; and they shall treat her as the deity instructs them." [ 245 ] 

■ "Any royal women either the king's wives or any other women of the palace who fight among 
themselves and in their quarrel blasphemously swear by the name of the god .... They shall cut 
the throat of the one who has cursed the god Ashur in their quarrel. . ."[ 246 ] 

Mutilation was a common punishment among the Assyrians: 

■ "If either a slave or a slave woman should receive something from a man's wife, they shall cut off 
the slave's or the slave woman's nose and ears; they shall restore the stolen goods; the man shall 
cut off his own wife's ears. But if he releases his wife and does not cut off her ears, they shall not 
cut off the nose and ears of the slave or slave woman, and they shall not restore the stolen goods. 

[ T ] 

■ "In addition to the punishments to a man's wife that are written in the tablet, a man may whip 
his wife, pluck out her hair, mutilate her ears, or strike her with impunity" [ 248 ] 

Rape was punishable by death. And for kissing a woman against her will, the kisser's lower lip was 
cut off. Adultery was punishable by death for both parties. 

Although the Assyrians were also victims of the Sumerian Swindle, they did not allow the perversions 
of the Babylonian moneylenders to enter their society. Homosexual perverts, so common among the 
Babylonian moneylenders, were punished in this manner: 

■ "If a man sodomizes his comrade and they prove the charges against him and find him guilty, 


they shall sodomize him [with a stick] and they shall turn him into a eunuch." [ 249 ] 

In addition to their cruelty and practice of terrorism, the incessantly acquisitive demands of the 
Assyrian tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class was a major driving force behind the kings. Silver 
was made available to the kings' ambitions while both the principle and interest were repaid by the kings 
from taxes, tribute and the war-prizes of loot. And "as it has always been", it was the People who paid 
the full price in their blood for the ambitions of the politicians and the greed of the moneylenders. And 
because the Sumerian Swindle produced more debt than there was silver to repay it, the Assyrian kings 
used warfare as their main method of obtaining that phantom silver. 

It was during the reign of Shalmaneser III (858-824 BC) that Assyria first came into conflict with 
the kingdom of Israel, although the incident concerned is known only from the Assyrian records and 
not from the Bible. The clash occurred when the Syrian and Palestinian States formed a coalition against 
an Assyrian expedition to the Mediterranean in 853 BC. According to the Assyrian records the coalition 
forces included "2,000 chariots and 10,000 soldiers of Akhabbu of the land of Sirala". Akhabbu of Sirala 
was unquestionably Ahab of Israel. Shalmaneser claimed a defeat of the coalition forces, a claim borne 
out by the fact that a monument of four years later shows an emissary of Jehu, Ahab's successor, paying 
tribute. [ 250 ] [see Figure 12] 

Assyria was thus in complete control of Syria and of all the trade routes into Asia Minor. 
Iron production, still largely a monopoly of Asia Minor, came under Assyrian control, as did timber 
production in the Lebanon and the silver mines in the Amanus under Shalmaneser. Syrian craftsmen 
and artists were deported to the Assyrian cities. [ 251 ] Syrian craftsmen were famous for their skill in ivory 
carving, and so from this time onwards the Assyrian kings carried off such men to the cities of Assyria, 
where they were employed in beautifying the royal palaces. Great quantities of carved ivory have been 
found at Nimrud, the site of the ancient capital Calah. [ 252 ] 

Shalmaneser III was succeeded by his accepted heir, Shamshi-Adad V (823-811 BC). This King 
continued the policy of his predecessors, undertaking military action in the north and north-east to 
defend Assyrian interests against Urartu and the Medes (an Iranian people who had migrated into 
North-West Persia). He also extended the area under his direct control to include the north-eastern 
edge of Babylonia, along the Diyala, and even intervened within Babylonia itself to impose submission 
upon some tribes called the Kaldu, whom we later know as Chaldaeans. These tribes, occupying the 
most southerly part of Babylonia, were virtually independent of the weak Babylonian King and were not 
paying their tribute. [ 253 ] 

Urartu gained a firm grasp on the regions immediately south of Lake Urmia and so controlled the 
trade routes from northern Iran. More serious still was the situation in the west where the Urartian thrust 
dispossessed Assyria of almost the whole region north and west of Carchemish, thereby taking from 
Assyria control of the metal trade of Asia Minor. Besides the economic consequences, this had a direct 
effect upon the military efficiency of Assyria, since almost the whole of the area upon which Assyria 
depended for the supply of horses was now in Urartian hands. The economic effects of the cutting of the 
routes into Asia Minor led to disturbances in Syria, and a number of campaigns were undertaken against 
Hatarikka (biblical Hadrach), Arpad and Damascus. It was during this period of Assyrian weakness that 
the reign of Jeroboam II of Israel is to be placed. [ 254 ] 

From about 800 BC, Urartian influence began to expand, especially in the North Syrian area, 
at the expense of Assyria. The following half century saw a drastic decline in the fortunes of Assyria. 
Conditions within the homeland became so bad that in 746 BC during a revolt in Calah, the capital, the 
whole of the royal family was murdered. [ 255 ] 

The man who came to the throne, who was probably of royal descent though not of the family 
of his predecessor, was a certain Pul, who took as his throne name Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 BC). He 


was one of the most able of Assyrian kings. He undertook extensive administrative reforms, reducing the 
power of provincial governors and at the same time increasing the efficiency of provincial administration. 
His reign saw a fresh extension of Assyrian influence to Babylon in the south and to Syria and Palestine 
in the west. His successor, Shalmaneser V (726-722 BC) maintained the same general policy. Shalmaneser 
V is best known from Biblical accounts for his siege of Samaria, the capital of Israel, which culminated in 
accordance with the usual Assyrian policy in the deportation to Assyria of the best of the population. (2 
Kings 17:6) [ 256 ] 

The story of the remaining period of the Assyrian Empire is one of continual expansion up to just 
after 640 BC, and then a catastrophic collapse. The principal kings of this period (known as the Sargonid 
period after the first of them) were Sargon II (721-705 BC), Sennacherib (704-681 BC), Esarhaddon 
(680-669 BC), and Ashurbanipal (680-626 BC). 

Sargon II seems to have had a taste for poetry, and some of his annals are written in an elegant 
verse form as against the dry prose of most other Assyrian kings. Sennacherib is generally thought of as 
a ruthless barbarian, not without justification, for he was one of the few conquerors of Babylon to sack 
that center of culture. At the same time he was very interested in technological progress. He claimed 
that he had invented a new method of metal casting, devised new irrigation equipment, and found 
new mineral resources. He was also proud of having laid out Nineveh as his new capital, with parks to 
beautify it and a new aqueduct to give it a plentiful supply of good water. [ 257 ] These were certainly not 
the accomplishments of a barbarian. 

Secretly, the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] had once again moved huge quantities of their 
bullion to the easily corrupted kings of Elam since that country seemed to offer the safest haven for their 
loot. This resulted in another depressed Assyrian economy. Sennacherib did not understand how Elam 
could so quickly acquire wealth while Assyria floundered. But he recognized that Elam was now the 
decisive factor in Babylonian politics. Sennacherib undertook action to neutralize this danger. In 692 BC, 
an Assyrian attack was made against Elam from the province of Der, to which the conquered Elamite 
territories were now annexed. But climatic conditions ended an attempt to penetrate into Elam proper. 

In Babylonia, Mushezib-Marduk refused to acknowledge the authority of the Assyrian governor 
and raised a rebellion, which, however, the local Assyrian authorities were able to contain. Escaping to 
Elam, he returned with an army and had himself proclaimed king of Babylon. He sent a considerable 
bribe to Elam from the temple treasuries of Babylon with a request for military assistance. The 
assistance was forthcoming. The Elamite moneylenders could foresee huge profits while the Babylonian 
moneylenders bewailed their loses as yet another king had confiscated their bullion. So, Mushezib- 
Marduk gained the wrath of the gods as well as the hatred of the moneylenders when he took their silver. 
In addition, by contributing to an anti- Assyrian army, the Babylonian temples placed themselves on the 
losing side and gave Sennacherib enough reason for again looting them after his victory. 

This occasional looting of their hoards of precious metals gave the crafty moneylenders reason 
to question the power of the gods. They could not help but notice that whenever a king looted a temple 
treasury nothing serious happened to him such as leprosy or being struck by lightning. The question no 
doubt arose in their guild meetings as to why the gods had not protected their treasures. Had they not 
served their gods enough or sacrificed to them enough? Had they sinned in some way as to make the god 
angry with them? How could the king take their treasures from the temple treasury and not be punished? 
Was the king stronger than the god? The idea began to arise among certain tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] guilds that perhaps if their gods abandoned them then the moneylenders should search for 
new and more powerful gods. 

The king of Elam mustered a great army from his own land and from the disaffected vassals who 
had formerly owed allegiance to Assyria. With these combined forces, he joined with the army of the 
Chaldaeans. This great force marched northwards into the province of Arrapkha, and met the Assyrian 


army at Halule on the Diyala. The annals of Sennacherib give a graphic picture of the slaughter which 
ensued. Assyrian chargers wading through blood; the plain littered with mutilated bodies of the slain, 
hacked to bits for the sake of their rings and bracelets or for mere blood-lust; terrified horses dragging 
chariots of the dead - with such graphic strokes the annals describe the carnage. 

Though claiming a victory the Assyrian army had suffered such losses that it could not follow 
up its advantage during the succeeding year. In 689 BC, internal affairs in Elam took a turn which kept 
the ruling house fully occupied, and the Assyrians, having made good the losses at the battle of Halule, 
were able to deal with Mushezib-Marduk. The Chaldaean forces retreated into Babylon, where they stood 
siege for nine months, finally succumbing to famine and disease. The Assyrian army entered the city 
and looted and sacked it, taking whatever valuables that they could out of the temple treasuries [ 258 ] and 
private mansions. 

Whether at the instigation of the moneylenders whose treasures he had looted or by his older 
sons who had been passed over in favor of Esarhaddon, Sennacherib was murdered in 681 BC. 

A word may be said here about the succession in Assyria. Although the kingship was normally 
treated as hereditary, it did not necessarily pass to the oldest son. Esarhaddon was Sennacherib's youngest 
son by an Aramaean second wife. Esarhaddon specifically emphasized that he was the chosen heir despite 
his being a younger son: [ 259 ] 

"Of my big brothers I was their little brother. At the command of Ashur [and other gods], my 
father formally promoted me in the assembly of my brothers, saying thus: 'This is the son of my 
succession.' When he asked the gods Shamash and Adad by liver divination, they answered him a 
definite 'Yes!', saying thus: 'He is your successor.' He therefore paid respect to their solemn word 
and he assembled the people of Assyria, small and great, with my brothers the seed of my father's 
house, and he made them swear their solemn oath before Ashur [and other gods], the gods of 
Assyria, the gods who dwell in heaven and earth, to protect my succession." [ 260 ] 

The accession of a king, if approved by the gods, was accompanied by various favorable signs. 
Esarhaddon said that when he ascended (after putting down an attempted usurpation), "there blew the 
south wind, the breath of Ea, the wind whose blowing is good for the exercise of kingship; favorable signs 
appeared in the heavens and on the earth." Even at this late date, over 2,000 years later, when the memory 
of Sumeria had already disappeared from both Mankind and written record, the Sumerian god, Ea, was 
still worshipped in Assyria. [ 261 ] Thus, it should be remembered that although these people came from a 
variety of races, they all accepted the ancient culture "just as it had always been." 

In their piety they relied upon the gods communicating with them through divinations over the 
liver of a sheep and with "favorable signs" such as which way the wind was blowing or the appearance 
of certain birds and animals. This is not to say that God does not communicate with Man using such 
methods but to rely upon them without ameliorating them with common sense can lead to disaster as 
was the case numerous times in ancient history. Good omens or not, Esarhaddon still had to fight a six 
weeks civil war against his brothers to keep his throne. In 681 BC, he was declared king. He immediately 
began rebuilding the Esagila temple of Babylon. 

Note should always be taken of the piety of all of the Mesopotamian people at all stages of their 
history. They were not the total barbarians that the lying rabbis claim that they were, but they were 
sincere worshippers of God. In fact, the rituals that the perfidious rabbis claim were given to them by 
their Yahweh god as their very own, are not so very different, if at all different, than the rituals practiced 
by every religion of the ancient Near East. So, one may ask: "If the Yahweh god was such a unique and 
new discovery, why were his temple and laws so typically Babylonian?" 

What the Jews have been claiming as something unique is really nothing new in the ancient world 


of gods and goddesses. The only difference between the gods of the ancient Near East and the Yahweh 
god of the Jews, is that the ancient people would tell you what they believed while the Jews lie to you 
about what they believe. 

For example, consider this priestly description of the proper way to make sacrifice to the 
Assyrian and Babylonian Moon God, Sin, and see if it is much different than that recommend in the Old 

"At night you shall sweep the roof before Sin; you shall sprinkle holy water. 

You shall pile up a pyre; upon the pyre you shall fix seven loaves of emmer. 

You shall divide up a pure lamb, without blemish. 

Three measures of flour which a male has milled, 

One measure of salt, you shall prepare; 

And seven clay bottles you shall fill with honey, ghee, wine, beer and water, 

And pile them on the pyre; 

You shall pour a libation of the concoction and do obeisance. 

The remainder you shall cast into the river." 

Another example, among many examples which could be cited, is this prayer to Ishtar 
(represented by the planet Venus) implying a quite noble conception of the relationship between Man 
and the deity: 

"O heroic one, Ishtar; the immaculate one of the goddesses, 

Torch of heaven and earth, radiance of the continents, 

The goddess, Lady of Heaven, first-begotten of Sin, first-born of Ningal, 

Twin-sister of the hero Shamash [the Sun-god]; 

Ishtar , you are Anu [the supreme god], you rule the heavens; 
With Enlil the Counselor you advise mankind; 

The Word, creator of liturgies and rituals of "Hand- washing". . . . 

Where conversation takes place, you, like Shamash , are paying attention,. . .. 

You alter the Fates, and an ill event becomes good; 

1 have sought you among the gods; supplications are offered to you; 

To you among the goddesses I have turned, with intent to make entreaty, 

Before you is a protecting shedu angel, 

Behind you a protecting lamassu angel, 

At your right is Justice, at your left Goodness, 

Fixed on your head are Audience, Favor, Peace, 

Your sides are encompassed with Life and Well-being; 

How good it is to pray to you, how blessed to be heard by you! 

Your glance is Audience, your utterance is the Light. 

Have pity on me, O Ishtar ! Order my prospering! 

Glance on me in affirmation! Accept my litany! .... 

I have borne your yoke; set tranquility for me!" [ 262 ] 

These were not the crass and benighted people whom the lying rabbis have slandered for the past 
2,500 years. They were a pious and religious folk who valued Justice and Goodness. 

Innana , later known as Ishtar, held a position of vast significance in the Sumerian and the 
subsequent Babylonian religion. Particularly after the Semitic Amorites (Aramaeans) had become 


predominant and women began losing their social position and prestige, she remained as virtually the 
only female deity. Eventually she assimilated the personality and functions of all of the other goddesses, 
until the word "Ishtar" became synonymous with the word for "goddess". 

This reduction in the number of goddesses from a minimum of one wife-consort for each of the 
thousands of gods, down to just Ishtar alone, reflects the lower status of women under the Semites than 
had been experienced by women during the more egalitarian Sumerian times. As the number of slaves, 
brothels and temple prostitutes increased as a result of the corrupt wealth of the Semitic merchant- 
moneylenders with their harems of wives and concubines, the high status of women declined. As has 
been universally demonstrated, what is good for the moneylenders is bad for the people. And to further 
enslave both women and men, Ishtar became the goddess of prostitutes, the goddess of love, and the 
goddess of war. And no one loved reducing women to prostitution, and no one loved throwing men into 
the bloody jaws of war, more than did the tamkarum [merchants and moneylenders]. 

Ishtar revealed herself as the planet Venus; and her two aspects - goddess of love and goddess 
of war - have been related to her manifestation respectively as Evening and Morning Star. But the 
significance of the goddess of love also being the goddess of war, has been overlooked. It was a wily 
stratagem of the moneylenders. Like the Sun God, Shamash , she was the child of the Moon-god, Sin . 
Ishtar was worshipped in most periods and places, from at least Proto -literate times in Uruk down to 
the century before the Christian era in Babylon. [ 263 ] Four thousand years of religious devotion complete 
with temples, priests and millions of devotees, is an entrenched religious culture that would be difficult 
to replace with one god overcoming another. After all, the mythology of those times clearly showed that 
all of the gods were related to one another like a family genealogy. Ishtar, as a child of the Moon God, 
naturally became the tool of those who prayed to the Moon God, that is, the tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylenders] who profited from both the whore house and the battle field. 

Even though the societies of the ancient Near East were increasingly being diverted into 
materialistic engines that produced more and more wealth for the awilum [the Haves] at the expense and 
the hardship of the muskenum [the Have-Nots], the gods were very much loved, respected, prayed to, 
and feared by all members of society from kings to slaves. God-consciousness was at the foundation of all 
human societies, that is, until the moneylenders began their frauds and betrayals. But regardless of what 
the moneylenders did, ancient societies were ultimately tied together by religion. Every day was begun 
and sustained by prayer to the gods. 

Perhaps relying too much on liver divination and propitious signs from Heaven and perhaps 
remembering the hard feelings that he had experienced from his older brothers upon his ascension to 
the throne. Esarhaddon tried two new ideas, both of which had disastrous results. One was to attempt to 
incorporate Egypt into his Empire. This over-stretched Assyrian military resources and was one factor 
underlying the later collapse of Assyria. The other new policy was to bequeath Babylonia to one son and 
Assyria and the rest of the Empire to another. The result here was that the two brothers, at first the best of 
friends, became personally involved in the old tensions between Assyria and Babylonia, so that civil war 
broke out. [ 264 ] 

The son to whom Esarhaddon bequeathed Assyria and the major part of the Empire was 
Ashurbanipal. This King prided himself on his literacy and tells us: "I grasped the wisdom of Nabu (the 
god of the scribes), the whole of the scribal art of all the experts!" Certainly he was keenly interested in 
cuneiform literature, for it was he who was mainly responsible for collecting one of the great cuneiform 
libraries at Nineveh. [ 265 ] 

While Esarhaddon (680-669 BC) managed his vast empire filled with fighting and squabbling 
petty kingdoms, it fell to Ashurbanipal (680-626 BC) to fulfil the arrangements for the attack planned 
upon Egypt. Egypt had been controlled by non-Egyptians since 945 BC when Libyans through marriage 
inheritances took control under Shosheng I (945-924 BC). This was the Libyan or Bubastic Dynasty. 


The Libyan Dynasties were followed by the Negroes of Kush forcing them out. There is some 
evidence that they were aided by the Egyptian priests who did not find the Libyans to be pious enough. In 
730 BC, the Negroes from Kush attacked and established the 25th Dynasty. First, Piye was black Pharaoh 
until 715 BC when Shabok inherited the throne. And then Taharqa came to power. Taharqa was the black 
Pharaoh whom Assurbanipal attacked. 

But as a result of Ashurbanipal's other commitments, Egypt remained undisturbed for three years. 
First, he had to settle a treaty by which the Phoenician king of Tyre made his submission. Then, he had 
to install Shamash-shum-ukin as king of Babylonia, after which he fought a punitive campaign into the 
Kassite area. Finally, in 671 BC, a strong Assyrian army with contingents from Syria, Phoenicia, Palestine 
and Cyprus, marched into Egypt. The black Pharaoh was defeated and withdrew to Thebes. Once again 
Memphis was in Assyrian hands. 

In Egypt, the Assyrians freed a large number of Semitic slaves. These descendants of the Hyksos 
had been held in bondage since 1550 BC. He allowed them to depart Egypt and settle in Canaan and 
Sinai. With the prospect of Assyrian occupation, a subsequent attempt at rebellion was made by the 
native princes, led by Necho. But Assyrian forces arrested the ringleaders and quashed the conspiracy. In 
view of the necessity of using acceptable native princes for the administration of a country such as Egypt, 
with a venerable and efficient bureaucratic system, the captured princes were treated with clemency and 
after being taken to Nineveh to be loaded with gifts and favors and no doubt to enter into treaty-relation, 
they were returned to their posts with Necho installed as Pharaoh. [ 266 ] 

Finally, the civil war between Ashurbanipal and his brother in Babylon very seriously weakened 
the Empire. None the less, when Ashurbanipal finally captured Babylon in 648 BC, his position seemed 
superficially as strong as ever, so that between then and 639 BC, using Babylonia as an operating base, 
he was able to undertake a series of campaigns against Elam. There were, however, fresh factors on 
the world scene. In Iran, north of Elam, the Medes, a group of vigorous Iranian tribes (a branch of the 
Indo-European race) who had migrated into the area at about 900 BC, were becoming a powerful force. 
Already at the time of Esarhaddon, they had been of sufficient importance for him to bind them by 
treaty to support his arrangement for the succession after his death. By 650 BC they had consolidated 
themselves into a powerful kingdom which successfully opposed Assyria. 

North of Assyria, the kingdom of Urartu had been destroyed by fresh hordes of Cimmerians 
and Scythians from Central Asia, who occupied territory deep into Asia Minor. Although Ashurbanipal 
succeeded for a while in using these hordes to his own advantage (as when he set them against a king on 
the coast of Asia Minor who was supporting the independence movement in Egypt), it was only a matter 
of time before some of them turned against Assyria itself. [ 267 ] 

With hordes of Cimmerian and Scythian cavalry roaming over Asia Minor and the territories of 
Urartu, trade with the northern region of Asia Minor was at a standstill, and one of the principal sources 
of iron was cut off. To the East, the numerically powerful Median tribes of Iran, generally described in 
the annals of Tiglath-Pileser III and Sargon II as "the mighty Medes" or "the wide spreading Medes" 
in recognition of their wide geographical extent, were now settling and coalescing into powerful units 
which ultimately became a kingdom able to meet the military might of Assyria on equal terms. Their 
confederacy deprived Assyria of another important source of metals and horses, and cut the routes 
bringing spices and semi-precious stones from India. 

To the South, Babylonia was being over-run by the Chaldaean tribes who had been new 
immigrants and cheap labor for the Kassite moneylenders. They had purchased farm lands and learned 
the ways of civilization from their "friends" the moneylenders. These Semitic Aramaeans (Amorites) had 
been sold the disposed farms that the Kassite tamkarum had swindled from their own people. When 
conditions in Babylonia became unstable, they rose up and seized the whole of southern Babylonia as 
well as substantial areas in the north. In the course of the recurrent rebellions, they had learned from the 


Assyrians much of the science of warfare and from the native Babylonians the arts of peace. [ 268 ] And 
from the Kassite moneylenders, the Chaldaeans learned the Secret Frauds of the Sumerian Swindle. 

We know very little about Ashurbanipal's reign after 639 BC except that the situation for Assyria 
was becoming increasingly grave with anti-Assyrian coalitions forming on the North, East and South 
of Assyria. When Ashurbanipal died in 626 BC, a certain Nabopolassar, relying on support from the 
Chaldaean (Kaldu) tribes of Babylonia, assumed the kingship of Babylonia. However, Ashurbanipal's 
successors, Ashur-etillu-ili and Sin-shar-ishkun, still tried to retain authority in parts of Babylonia. 
But Nabopolassar made an alliance with the Medes, and his complete success against a weakened and 
surrounded Assyria was almost inevitable. [ 269 ] 

At the very end, Assyria found an unexpected ally in Egypt. Assyria had freed Egypt from the 
Negro Pharaohs and had re-installed native Egyptians as kings, so the Egyptians owed a debt of gratitude 
to Assyria. The Egyptian support was, however, too late and Nineveh fell in 612 BC. The remnant of the 
Assyrian forces with their Egyptian allies, made a last stand at Carchemish in 605 BC, only to meet with 
final defeat. The Assyrian Empire was irrevocably at an end. [ 270 ] And Babylonia, under the command of 
Nabopolassar, became inheritor of the conquered Assyrian territories. 

But at his moment of victory, Nabopolassar died. His son and successor Nebuchadnezzar II had 
been his father's Commander-in-Chief, and was a general of great experience and ability. He grasped the 
remains of the Assyrian Empire and, thus founding the Neo-Babylonian Empire, extended his authority 
to the Egyptian border. His two attacks upon Jerusalem in 597 and 587 BC and the deportation of the 
Jews to Babylonia are well-known. The Jews make a big deal out of these events as if their fly-speck of a 
kingdom was a great loss to history. Nebuchadnezzar's actions were, in fact, simply small incidents in his 
struggle to impose his authority over Canaanite lands which the new Egyptian dynasty regarded as its 
own sphere of influence. The Medes at the same time grabbed some Assyrian territory and extended their 
realm to include the old kingdom of Urartu and much of Asia Minor. [ 271 ] 

Once Assyria was destroyed, one finds in the Neo-Babylonian empire far less concentration of 
power in the hands of the king. The domestic history of Babylonia during the following century was in 
some aspects a struggle for power between the dynasty and the temples, a struggle in which the temples 
were finally victorious. 

In Assyria, the king was consecrated at the beginning of his reign once and for all, and so became 
the representative of the gods without limitation. However, in Babylonia, even to the very end, the king 
had to lay his insignia humbly before the god each year, submit to personal indignities at the hands of 
the high priest, make a declaration of good intentions, and only then receive re-investiture with the royal 
authority by once again "taking the hand of the god". This power of the Babylonian priests over the king 
became a great danger to the authority of the king if he was ever out of favor with the priests. Besides the 
slaps on the face and the ear-pulling that the king received from the priests of Marduk as a part of the 
ceremony, there was always the danger that the priests would use a liver divination or some other sign 
from the gods to remove the king's authority. And what king could retain his authority if the gods were 
against him? His own people would leave his services out of fear of the gods. 

Thus, in Babylonia the king remained a tenant-at-will of the god and as such was less able to 
gather temple lands into his own hands and thereby into permanent royal control. This power of the 
temple in political and economic affairs was envied by the tamkarum [merchant-moneylender] class 
because it was a power that they could not buy. However, they could corrupt and steal it. In all of these 
ancient societies, even if a king ruled, it was the god of the temple priests who had the greatest power 
over all. 

In the provinces of the Neo-Babylonian empire, the general lines of Assyrian policy continued 
to be carried out. Thus, the deportations by Nebuchadnezzar II, in 597 BC and 586 BC, of sections of 
the people of Judah were nothing but a continuation of the policy instituted by Ashur-nasir-pal II (884- 


859 BC) and developed by Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 BC) to deal with recalcitrant vassals. At the same 
time Nebuchadnezzar II, like the Assyrian government in similar circumstances, appears to have made 
strenuous attempts to preserve a native administration for governing the people who were not deported. 

After the surrender of Jerusalem in 597 BC and the deportation of the young king Jehoiachin 
along with his administration and his court clowns dressed as rabbis, Nebuchadnezzar II attempted 
indirect rule by using Zedekiah as a vassal prince bound to Babylonia. For nine years the experiment 
was successful. Even after the siege and capture of Jerusalem consequent on Zedekiah's ultimate yielding 
to the pro-Egyptian party, Nebuchadnezzar still did not abandon the attempt to employ some form of 
indirect rule. So, he appointed a Jewish nobleman, Gedaliah, as governor. It was only after Gedaliahs 
assassination by Jewish zealots that Judah came under direct Babylonian administration^ 272 ] 

It was during the Neo-Babylonian Period that the power of the moneylender guilds was at it 
highest. These secretive brotherhoods of schemers had cemented their business relationships well enough 
through guild membership and marriages that they no longer needed to use written contracts for their 
business transactions between one another. Such was their mutual trust! The tamkarum [merchant- 
moneylender] guilds were international in membership. They controlled the flow of goods and bullion 
across the borders of all kingdoms, without bothering to notify the kings of their true loyalties. Since 
Sumerian times, it had been the practice to commit every transaction to writing. But for the first time, the 
Neo-Babylonian wholesale merchants seem to have preferred oral agreements supplemented by a variety 
of operational devices. [ 273 ] With oral agreements between trusted guild brothers, all sorts of schemes 
and plots were possible without fear of detection or proof of treachery. But a dearth of clay tablets does 
not mean that contracts were not used at all. It was during these times that cuneiform characters written 
on durable clay were being replaced by Semitic alphabets written on perishable parchment. Aramaic had 
become the international language of business and politics. 

At the death of Nebuchadnezzar II in 562 BC, he was succeeded by his son Amel-Marduk (Evil- 
Merodach of 2 Kings 35:27 and Jeremiah) who after a brief reign of two years was killed in a revolution. 
Little is known of him beyond the statement in 2 Kings 25:27-30 that he showed special favor to 
Jehoiachin, one of the two ex-kings of Judah held at Babylon. Curiously enough there is a direct reference 
to Jehoiachin in some cuneiform tablets found at Babylon and datable to the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. 
These tablets are lists of ration issues and the relevant part of one of them reads: 

"For Ya'u-kina king of the land Yahudu, for the five sons of the king of the land of Yahudu, (and) 
for eight Yahudaeans, each one-half sila (one-half liter) of grain per day." 

Philologically, "Ya'u-kinu of Yahudu" is unmistakably the name which the Bible translators render 
Jehoiachin of Judah. 

The man who benefited by the death of king Amel-Marduk and the one who led the revolution to 
depose him, was Nergal-shar-usur (Neriglissar of the Greek accounts, Nergal-shar-ezer of Jeremiah 39:3), 
a son-in-law of Nebuchadnezzar II. It is now known from a Babylonian chronicle that he undertook a 
great and foolish campaign across the Taurus Mountains, wasting the men and strength of Babylonia. 
After initial success this usurper suffered a serious defeat and returned to Babylon in 556 BC, dying so 
soon afterwards that one is tempted to wonder if his personal rivals at home took advantage of his loss 
of prestige to hasten his end. Certainly his son, Labashi-Marduk, who attempted to assume the throne in 
succession, was very shortly removed by a rebellion of the chief officers of state, who put on the throne 
Nabu-na'id (Nabonidus), the diplomatist who had been commissioned by Nebuchadnezzar II to assist 
negotiations between the Medes and Lydians in 585 B.C. 

Why would the chief officers of the Neo-Babylonian empire want Nabonidus to lead them rather 
than someone of the lineage of Nebuchadnezzar? A desire for honest government was the reason. That 


Nabonidus had been a wise and loyal diplomat who could lead effectively was important. But most 
important was that he was a sincerely religious man. He had the trust of the chief officers who had 
rebelled against the usurper, Nergal-shar-usur, and his son, Labashi-Marduk. And he was a devotee of the 
Moon God, Sin, the god of the moneylenders of Ur. 

Nabonidus (555-539 BC), already in his sixties, ascended the throne after many years of service 
to Nebuchadnezzar II. He was not a member of Nebuchadnezzar lis family. He was to be the last of the 
Neo-Babylonian kings. As he wrote: "I am Nabu-na'id who has not the honor of being a somebody - 
kingship is not within me." Certainly, a humble comment from a king! 

Nabonidus was not of the royal family of Nabopolassar but was the son of a nobleman and of the 
high-priestess of Sin, the Moon God at Harran. This lady may have been of the Assyrian royal house, 
for she was born in the middle of the reign of Ashurbanipal. It is well known that before and after this 
time the high-priesthood of the great shrines was commonly bestowed upon princes and princesses of 
the royal family. Thus, over the millennia, the priesthoods of Mesopotamia had been corrupted in their 
holiness by the political insertion of unqualified relatives into the office of high priest. Mixing political 
and religious power while keeping both powers under the authority of the king, gave control over the 
entire population as well as control over the finances of the temples. That is, the kings had control of 
everybody except for the moneylenders who hypocritically gave an outward show of obedience to the will 
of both king and god while secretly making plans and plotting schemes of their own. 

Being the son of the high priestess of the Moon God, would have had an effect upon anyone born 
to such a position. For Nabonidus, the effects were extreme. He was a very religious man whose life was 
ruled by his god. Once again remember that this was an age when the divinations over the liver of a sheep 
or the meaning of dreams or the consequences of omens in the heavens, were all piously accepted as 
messages from the gods. That Nabonidus became king, whose mother was priestess to the Moon God, are 
facts that don't seem to have been properly understood by the atheist archeologists who profess confusion 
over the subsequent historical events. 

At the beginning of his reign, Nabonidus had a dream in which Marduk ordered him to rebuild 
the Temple of Sin at Harran. This temple had lain desolate for fifty-four years. This was his mother's 
temple and he no doubt wanted to please her since she was still living at Harran. And now that he was 
king of all of Babylonia, he had the power to do so. Once again note the piety of these kings of the ancient 
Near East. Based upon a dream wherein the god, Marduk , spoke to him, Nabonidus changed both state 
policy and the destiny of his entire kingdom. All based upon a religiously inspired dream! Remember this 
when we explore the dreams and fantasies of the Jews in Volume II, The Monsters of Babylon. 

A surviving cuneiform text records the dream in which Marduk instructed the new king to 
undertake the work at Harran. Nabonidus wrote: 

"At the beginning of my reign the gods let me see a dream. In it there stood both Marduk , the 
Great Lord, and Sin, the light of heaven and earth. Marduk said to me: 'Nabu-na'id, King of 
Babylon, bring bricks on your own horse and chariot and build the temple of Ehulhul [lit. 'the 
house of joy'] that Sin, the Great Lord, may take up his dwelling there.' I replied to Marduk , the 
chief of the gods, 'The Medes are laying siege to the very temple you have ordered me to build 
and their armed might is very great.' But Marduk said to me, 'The Medes of whom you spoke, 
they, and their country and all the kings who march at their side, shall cease to exist!' And indeed, 
when the third year came to pass, Marduk made rise against them Cyrus, King of Anshan, his 
young servant, and Cyrus scattered the numerous Medes with his small army and captured 
Astyages, King of the Medes and brought him in fetters into Cyrus' land. That was the doing of 
the Great Lord Marduk , whose command cannot be changed." [ 274 ] 


Nabonidus rebuilt the temple and re-dedicated it to the Moon God, Sin, though with some 
considerable opposition from the priests of Babylon. He also gave special attention to the centers of moon 
worship at Ur and later at the oasis of Tayma in Arabia. His growing devotion to the Moon God was a 
religious change which caused friction with the traditional religious factions in Babylonia. Nabonidus' 
mother, Adad-guppi, was devoted to this god at Harran. According to her biography, Adad-guppi lived 
104 years. So, her life spanned the entire Neo-Babylonian period. [ 275 ] 

In his dedications, Nabonidus' inscriptions expressed what he considered the impiety and 
lawlessness of his subjects. [ 276 ] This pious king could see for himself the rampant fraud and ruthless 
avarice of the Babylonian society which was under the oppressive debts and the debauching of the 
tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]. Through licentiousness and desperation, both of which were 
promoted by and profited by the merchants and moneylenders, the People had abandoned the holy way 
of devotion to the gods. Making money to give to the tamkarum had become their main concern. 

This long decline in public morals and piety can be seen in the changes that occurred in the 
Peoples' allegiance to the gods over the millennia. During Sumerian times, the ancient Ubaidian city 
of Uruk was home to the temple of Arm, the god of heaven and king of the gods. Every Mesopotamian 
city had its chief god residing in its main temple. But every city also had numerous smaller temples 
and chapels devoted to the lesser gods of that city. Until the end of the Third Dynasty of Ur when the 
Sumerians still controlled their own culture, Anu was the Sumerian god of heaven and he resided in 
the biggest temple in Uruk. His daughter was the goddess Ianna, the Sumerian goddess of love and 
warfare. She resided in a small temple. But as the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders] gained debt-slave 
ownership of women through their money lending scams, and as the prestige of women was degraded 
through slavery and prostitution, the Peoples' devotion to Anu , the god of heaven, decreased and the 
devotees of Ianna (Ishtar) increased. 

As the Sumerians were replaced by the promiscuous Semites (variously called Akkadians, 
Amorites and Aramaeans); and as the Sumerian culture was replaced by the ruthless, materialistic, 
Semitic Babylonian culture; and as the protective authority of the kings and the moral authority of the 
priests were subverted by the money-grubbing power of the tamkarum [merchant-moneylenders]; the 
temple of Anu became less prosperous while the temple of Ianna ( Ishtar ) became predominant. In a 
culture that was dominated by moneylenders, merchants, bankers, and whore-mongers, the temple of 
Ishtar (the goddess of love and war) became the biggest temple in Uruk by Neo-Babylonian times. 

Despite its great agricultural wealth, the Neo-Babylonian empire suffered severe economic 
constraints. During the previous wars against Assyria and against the Medes, man power had been 
diverted to the army while the fields and canals fell into neglect. This was always a recipe for famine. 
The military and building campaigns of Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar had taken their toll and the 
disasterous military adventures of Nergal-shar-usur had drained away dwindling resources. Some of 
Babylonia's major trade routes in the east fell to Median control. The merchants, no longer limited by 
the ancient Laws of Hammurabi, raised prices by fifty percent. Babylonia also suffered from plague and 
famine. Nabonidus tried to explain the famine as a result of the impiety of the Babylonian people. [ 277 ] 
This was the usual belief for all of the peoples of the ancient Near East when faced with either good or 
bad events. That is, the benevolence or wrath of the gods was the result of the holiness or wickedness of 
the people. Even in bad times, as the People implored the gods to save them, the temples received gifts 
and donations of land and gold as sacrifices to the gods. 

But matters of godly provenance aside, the temples always had a source of gold and silver in their 
treasuries. It is clear from the cuneiform documents which have come down to us that the kings in the 
Neo-Babylonian period took a share of the temple revenues. Special royal officers were installed in the 
temples for this purpose. Among revenues which certainly went to the temples in the first instance were 
tithes on date-crops and catches offish, rents (payable in kind) on grain-land, a cattle tax, customary 


offerings made by farmers at the time of particular festivals, and other dues of a more or less obscure 
nature. There were also death duties which were levied on rich private citizens and which, like the tolls 
in certain of the canals, went wholly to the king even though the temple authorities may have been 
responsible for their assessment and collection. This was made possible by the sons and daughters of the 
kings being installed as high priests and priestesses. All in all, in the course of the sixth century BC the 
Neo-Babylonian kings managed to get control of an increasingly large share of the temple revenues. This 
increased the wealth and power of the king but tended t